MarkW Posted June 22, 2016 Author Share Posted June 22, 2016 Israel Rollout Ceremony View Live Wednesday, June 22, 10 a.m. CDT http://mtsports.com/lmf35israel.html Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Ken Cartwright Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 I think clearly the writing is on the wall that the aircraft will deliver what was promised, if more expensively. The other good news is the cost per unit is going down as the production rate goes up and assembly learning curve shallows out. At the end of the day, the detractors are going to look foolish, and if Canada, now having hit the reset button on the program, buys SuperHornets, they may regret it. The SuperHornet is a good jet, but that program is winding down and it is time to move on. I find it funny that the same sort of folks who talked about how the SuperHornet was such a piece of crap and a waste of money, are now calling it a better option than the brand new state of the art stealth capable netcentric cooperative engagement DAS equipped F-35. IIRC, they thought the original Hornet sucked too, and it turned out okay. I think the only fighter I can think of in my lifetime that has got away pretty much squeaky clean is the F-16, and now that I think about it, it had a few minor development problems too. This has been posted before, but in reference to the F-16: And some comments from General Vogt that sound very negative about the future of the F-16: Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Raceaddict Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 Lockheed Martin and Israel Celebrate Rollout of Israel’s First F-35 ‘Adir’ Unfortunately... no IAF camo. <_< Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 http://www.f-16.net/forum/download/file.php?id=23163&mode=view The SuperHornet is a good jet, but that program is winding down and it is time to move on. I find it funny that the same sort of folks who talked about how the SuperHornet was such a piece of crap and a waste of money, are now calling it a better option than the brand new state of the art stealth capable netcentric cooperative engagement DAS equipped F-35. IIRC, they thought the original Hornet sucked too, and it turned out okay. I think the only fighter I can think of in my lifetime that has got away pretty much squeaky clean is the F-16, and now that I think about it, it had a few minor development problems too. yep. Nobody gets away clean. Pentagon Anticipates Awarding F-35 Contract In First Quarter of 2017 (Source: Defense Insider; posted June 20, 2016) The Pentagon recently announced it anticipates awarding a contract to Lockheed Martin in the first quarter of calendar year 2017 for Joint Strike Fighter Lots 12-14. The proposed contract actions will provide for 100 F-35A conventional-takeoff-and-landing jets, 26 F-35B short-takeoff-and-vertical-landing aircraft and six F-35C carrier variant jets in Lot 12. Lot 13 includes 104 F-35As, 26 F-35Bs and 12 F-35Cs. Lot 14 provides for 88 F-35As, 30 F-35Bs and 18 F-35Cs, according to a June 16 presolicitation notice posted on the Federal Business Opportunities website. "Contract actions will provide for long lead time materials, parts, components, and effort; Ancillary Mission Equipment (AME); Production Non-Recurring (PNR) activities to support the F-35 production ramp rate including tooling, test equipment, production aids, production equipment, and support labor; technical, financial and administrative data; and proposal preparation," the notice reads. It adds: "Contract actions will also provide for associated sustainment support including spares, support equipment, non-recurring autonomic logistics sustainment activities, training, Autonomic Logistics Information Systems (ALIS) hardware, depot activation, Performance Based Logistics (PBL) operations, and maintenance for all F-35A, F-35B, and F-35C aircraft; and all efforts associated with the procurement of hardware for and sustainment of Joint Reprogramming Enterprise (JRE). Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 Lockheed Martin and Israel Celebrate Rollout of Israel’s First F-35 ‘Adir’ Unfortunately... no IAF camo. <_</> I didn't think we would get that. Roundel looks differently than what I expected there though. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jonathan_Lotton Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 I didn't think we would get that. Roundel looks differently than what I expected there though. Likely just temporary, last minute markings. I'm willing to bet the service markings will be a bit more obvious and unique. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MarkW Posted June 23, 2016 Author Share Posted June 23, 2016 Can't paint the gray. In other news, the Marines are either geniuses or idiots in the same article. Hint: The Fox News guy is an idiot. http://www.military.com/daily-news/2016/06/22/marine-corps-forced-to-pull-warbirds-out-of-boneyard.html Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MarkW Posted June 23, 2016 Author Share Posted June 23, 2016 You didn't see the USAF buying F/A-18E/Fs, and they turned out just fine... http://www.af.mil/News/ArticleDisplay/tabid/223/Article/809970/acc-f-35-on-track-for-ioc.aspx Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 (edited) Can't paint the gray. In other news, the Marines are either geniuses or idiots in the same article. Hint: The Fox News guy is an idiot. http://www.military.com/daily-news/2016/06/22/marine-corps-forced-to-pull-warbirds-out-of-boneyard.html If we bought super hornets, we would be stuck with them and maybe only them forever. Procurement is fun like that. When you tell congress you "need" something specific and then buy something else, They get the impression you don't need that specific thing anymore and just tell you to buy more of something else. Especially when the thing you need starts to run into trouble Which is why no one in the USMC is going to tell anyone "if only we bought super hornets" they had to go to some guy some "expert" who really doesn't understand military procurement isnt like renting movies at a blockbuster Edited June 23, 2016 by TaiidanTomcat Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jonathan_Lotton Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 This isn't the first time that "obsolete" and "old planes" have been refreshed for fleet/line use... I remember the hub-bub about the fact that the USN/USMC were refreshing and refurbishing F/A-18A's to A+ standard, and how the sky was falling, and etc etc... Now it seems like that's already been forgotten. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GreyGhost Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 What's a "blockbuster"? -Gregg Quote Link to post Share on other sites
82Whitey51 Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 (edited) Where have I seen this before...? ??? Oh yeah!...or a case of "Who wore it better" :) Edited June 23, 2016 by 82Whitey51 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 (edited) Where have I seen this before...? Who wore it better? What's a "blockbuster"? -Gregg Its like a netflix with walls, son. From the long ago time before computers could really talk to each other Edited June 23, 2016 by TaiidanTomcat Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tony Stark Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 Where have I seen this before...? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted June 24, 2016 Share Posted June 24, 2016 http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/story/defense/air-space/air-force/2016/06/21/f35-software-mountain-home-deployment/86191386/ WASHINGTON — Software glitches have plagued the F-35 in recent months, but operators said they noticed a marked improvement during a June deployment where the aircraft did not experience any shutdowns.The F-35 joint program office’s top official disclosed in April that the fighter jet was struggling with problems associated with the 3i software planned for use when the Air Force fields the planes later this year. Pilots reported that they had trouble booting up their jets, and would have to restart key systems on the plane every three to four hours after sensors shut off without warning. The program office implemented a fix the following month, and pilots and maintainers who operated the plane during the June deployment at Mountain Home Air Force Base, Idaho, said software bugs no longer seemed to be an issue. "We cleared 88 of 88 sorties, and we were on time for 100 percent of those sorties for the large force exercises,” Maj. Brad Matherne, an F-35A pilot from the 34th Fighter Squadron, told reporters during a June 21 conference call. “We had zero losses due to any software stability issues that were previously out there.” Seven F-35As and a total of 160 pilots, maintainers and other personnel from Hill Air Force Base, Utah, were sent to Mountain Home ahead of the F-35A’s initial operational capability, which could come as early as August. The deployment, which took place June 6-17, proved that the aircraft could successfully operate away from its home base against a variety of threats, said Col. David Lyons, commander 388th Fighter Wing and an F-35A pilot. For the deployment, jets were outfitted with the latest version of the software, 3ib6.21, Matherne said. He said that no shutdowns occurred on the ground or in flight due to software glitches. "To my knowledge, we did not have any degradations due to software instability,” he said. “From a mission systems and tactical employment, we met all of our tactical objectives, which would have been very difficult if that software was an issue, which it was not." Spare F-35s were used twice due to minor hardware problems that kept jets grounded during takeoff, said Capt. Richard Palz, officer in charge of the 34th Aircraft Maintenance Unit. In one incident, an internal battery failed and had to be removed and replaced. During the second event, the plane’s initial navigation system failed, necessitating maintenance. Both aircraft were returned to service after undergoing repairs and exhibited no additional issues, he said. DEFENSE NEWS F-35 Program Office Signs Off On Air Force 3i Software Having to move to a spare aircraft is not unusual, even during normal operations, Lyons said. “We were able to make on-time takeoffs to be a part of the mission and do what we needed to do,” he said. "Those are minor problems that you experience with any sort of aviation operation, and I was very, very impressed with the airplane from a reliability and stability perspective,” he said. Col. David Smith, commander of 419th Fighter Wing and currently an F-16 pilot, noted the two F-35 ground aborts are actually an improvement when compared to the failure rates of the F-16 and other 4th-generation aircraft. The software’s performance showed a marked improvement compared to a previous deployment to Mountain Home. During an exercise last February, F-35A aircraft from Edwards Air Force Base, Calif., prepared to make a rapid launch, but only one of six aircraft was able to successfully take off. In written testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee in May, Michael Gilmore, the Pentagon’s lead weapon’s tester, characterized the system shut down and restarts as “a symptom of immature systems and software.” Broken down "Barney style" for the Benefit of Canadian Government Quote Link to post Share on other sites
11bee Posted June 24, 2016 Share Posted June 24, 2016 (edited) http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/story/defense/air-space/air-force/2016/06/21/f35-software-mountain-home-deployment/86191386/ Broken down "Barney style" for the Benefit of Canadian Government Just a few questions / observations on that most impressive visual - A) Where did the data come from? B ) Did that 181 headcount also include LM / Pratt contractors? Since the tiny people in the graphic are all in uniform are we to believe that not a single contractor support this deployment or where they not included in the headcount? Or is the AF now able to dispatch a partial squadron without having contractors involved? If this is really the case, that is quite notable. C) Zero losses in mock dogfights against F-15E's? Really? What's next, a cool graphic showing how the F-35 dominates the B-1 in dogfights? BTW, what constituted a "dogfight"? In any event, things do seem to be trending in the right direction, so in that regard, I'm slightly pleased. Edited June 24, 2016 by 11bee Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted June 25, 2016 Share Posted June 25, 2016 (edited) http://www.tyndall.af.mil/News/tabid/6600/Article/808248/10-questions-on-the-f-35a-lightning-ii.aspx A^ B. since Johnny scooter mccain won't retire the A-10 to free up military, contractors are having to be used to a much larger degree, especially at Luke. Though I couldn't tell you how many were or there, and if so if that indicates anything during this deployment C. The mighty Su-35 weighs a whole 10000 lbs more than the F-15E. I know it's not a f-15C, but it's no slouch either. Edited June 25, 2016 by TaiidanTomcat Quote Link to post Share on other sites
11bee Posted June 25, 2016 Share Posted June 25, 2016 C. The mighty Su-35 weighs a whole 10000 lbs more than the F-15E. I know it's not a f-15C, but it's no slouch either. The Su isn't dripping with pods and scabbed on fuel tanks, it also has just a tad more thrust. I'd argue that the F-15E is a slouch. Not a slag against that aircraft. It's quite good at it what it was designed for, it just isn't in the A2A business. Did the JSF folks really have to lower the bar that much to find a aircraft it can consistently outmaneuver? Nice to see you back fighting the good fight TT, thought you might have become persona non grata around here. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted June 25, 2016 Share Posted June 25, 2016 The Su isn't dripping with pods and scabbed on fuel tanks, it also has just a tad more thrust. I'd argue that the F-15E is a slouch. Not a slag against that aircraft. It's quite good at it what it was designed for, it just isn't in the A2A business. Did the JSF folks really have to lower the bar that much to find a aircraft it can consistently outmaneuver? Nice to see you back fighting the good fight TT, thought you might have become persona non grata around here. How do you know what the F-15Es were carrying or how they were loaded? Especially with it being defensive red air? And I think it had a lot to do with them bring arouND and available at all Quote Link to post Share on other sites
11bee Posted June 25, 2016 Share Posted June 25, 2016 How do you know what the F-15Es were carrying or how they were loaded? Especially with it being defensive red air? And I think it had a lot to do with them bring arouND and available at all Never seen a picture of an operational E model without pods or CFT's, optimized for an A2A role. However, with money being tight these days, anything is possible. Maybe they'll be taking the gun and all the armor out of the A-10 and start to use them as aggressors as well? I'll bet the F-35 would smoke them just like it did to those poor F-15E's. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MarkW Posted June 25, 2016 Author Share Posted June 25, 2016 You are making some huge, unsupported assumptions about what defensive air was doing. You know none of the parameters, yet automatically assume the worst. Bravo. If these were set up as BVR engagements, the Strike Eagle is perfectly lethal, amongst the best. If it was set up as standard Soviet style centrally controlled air, then F-22s wouldn't have mattered. It must be hard on your rapidly shrinking island, watching the waters of RESULTS rise around you. Being the curmudgeon was so much easier when all you could do was speculate. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
11bee Posted June 25, 2016 Share Posted June 25, 2016 You are making some huge, unsupported assumptions about what defensive air was doing. You know none of the parameters, yet automatically assume the worst. Bravo. If these were set up as BVR engagements, the Strike Eagle is perfectly lethal, amongst the best. If it was set up as standard Soviet style centrally controlled air, then F-22s wouldn't have mattered. It must be hard on your rapidly shrinking island, watching the waters of RESULTS rise around you. Being the curmudgeon was so much easier when all you could do was speculate. Wow Mark. Tough morning and needed to vent? Take a few deep breaths and try to follow. I don't believe I'm speculating to any extent. The graphic TT graciously provided stated that the F-35 had zero losses in "dogfights" against the F-15E. That would seem to imply that these engagements were within visual range, BFM type of fight, no? Or has the definition of dogfighting been expanded to include BVR fights? Or maybe you believe that the F-15E is a top-tier "dogfighter" (which again would seem to imply high end maneuverability)? That's certainly your prerogative. However I have to admit I've never heard anyone else make that claim. I always thought the F-15E was optimized for a different mission and was significantly heavier and less maneuverable than the fighter variants. Maybe I'm wrong.... I'm in agreement that the Strike Eagle is probably a pretty decent platform in the BVR realm, although that aspect of the E doesn't seem to get a lot of press. If you have details on these "dogfights" that could shed some light on the claim TT posted, please feel free to share with the group. Otherwise, I'm simply taking that statement at face value and at face value, that claim doesn't seem to be particularly impressive. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GreyGhost Posted June 25, 2016 Share Posted June 25, 2016 Were they AESA equipped F-15Es? Just curious ... -Gregg Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tony Stark Posted June 25, 2016 Share Posted June 25, 2016 Were they AESA equipped F-15Es? Just curious ... -Gregg Odds are good some of them were. F-15Es from Mountain Home began transitioning to AESA radars two years ago and they're scheduled for completion within the next 6-7 months. It should also be noted that the primary AAM for both the F-15E and F-35, is the BVR AIM-120 AMRAAM. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MarkW Posted June 26, 2016 Author Share Posted June 26, 2016 Stark, you are injecting facts, sir, into a highly emotional debate. How dare you. And when did the F-15E become a total pig in the air? It's no C, but it's no F-18 either. And a clean F-16 under the right circumstances could wax them all. So again, making assumption Bee about what the parameters were, and assuming they were favorable to the F-35, is doubly assumptious. The real issue that puts a burr under your saddle is that the F-35 won ANY A2A engagements, because we all know that is impossible. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.