The Future of the F-35 Italy cuts back

[GDS_Starfury]

in a air defence capacity sure.  10 to 20 aid defence UAVs over a fleet or anti COIN/SAS missions over the FEBA, I see it.
but projecting that power.  not so much.  its the offensive end you need the human part of on scene.

[Barthheart]

in a air defence capacity sure.  10 to 20 aid defence UAVs over a fleet or anti COIN/SAS missions over the FEBA, I see it.
but projecting that power.  not so much.  its the offensive end you need the human part of on scene.

+1
Nothing like having a human on scene to fully take in the situation. Offensive air patrols would be extremely hard to do from a couch in the US somewhere.... and no enemy would take you seriously.

[LongBlade]

in a air defence capacity sure.  10 to 20 aid defence UAVs over a fleet or anti COIN/SAS missions over the FEBA, I see it.
but projecting that power.  not so much.  its the offensive end you need the human part of on scene.

Could not agree more.

Computers are garbage-in-garbage-out. A Mark I eyeball and Mark I brain never hurt.

[Windigo]

Pilots start F-35 training flights as Pentagon report pans jet
Wed, Mar 6 2013
By Andrea Shalal-Esa

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Some students in the U.S. Air Force's F-35 fighter pilot school took their first flights on Wednesday in the new radar-evading jet as a report by the Pentagon's chief tester found fault with early versions of the plane's radar, pilot helmet and other systems.

The report by Michael Gilmore, the Defense Department's director of operational test and evaluation (DOT&E), was sent to Congress last month, but was first published by the watchdog group, Project on Government Oversight, on Wednesday.

Gilmore has been critical of the U.S. Air Force's decision to start training F-35 pilots while the new Lockheed Martin Corp (LMT.N: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz) plane is still in development, arguing that pilots are at risk until the jet has amassed more flight hours in testing.

The latest report by Gilmore's office comes at a difficult time for the $396 billion weapons program, which has already been grounded twice this year, and faces possible cuts as a result of the mounting pressure on the U.S. defense budgets.

Defense officials said they were not surprised by the negative tone of the report given Gilmore's views, but said it included no "showstoppers" that jeopardized the program, which must complete several more years of development before it moves into combat testing and is declared ready for operational use.

The report reviewed an "operational utility evaluation" conducted by the Air Force last year before it decided to start training seasoned pilots to fly the F-35 fighter. The training lasts three months and includes time in the classroom, on sophisticated simulators, and in the air.

This year, the Air Force says it plans to train about 72 pilots and 711 mechanics to maintain the new planes. The first official class just completed the academic portion of their training and are now taking to the skies.

Gilmore's report said there was little to be gained by training pilots at this point, given technical issues and flight limitations on the new airplane.

"The limitations, workarounds, and restrictions in place in an air system this early in development limit the utility of training," the report said. "Little can be learned from evaluating training in a system this immature."

The report said the plane's radar, the display in the pilot helmet and the cockpit interfaces for controlling the plane's radios and navigational functions all needed improvement.

Pilots were unable to fly at night or during cloudy weather during the Air Force evaluation, given the immaturity of the current version of the plane. They were unable to practice advanced handling, slow flight, dives and use of the plane's afterburners, according to the Pentagon report.

It said pilots faced risks because the plane's water-activated ejection system was not installed on the early jets, the ejection seat had not yet been fully tested, and the jet did not have a qualified lightning protection system.

The report also included comments from the four experienced pilots who flew the jets during the Air Force evaluation, in which they expressed concerns about problems with the plane's radar and visibility during combat or more intense training.

Referring to close-range visual combat, one of the pilots said, "The head rest is too large and will impede aft visibility and survivability during surface and air engagements," and, "Aft visibility will get the pilot gunned every time."

Winslow Wheeler, a long-time critic of the plane who posted the report for the watchdog group, said the new report showed that the Air Force, or conventional takeoff and landing model of the F-35 was "flawed beyond redemption."

The Air Force's Air Education and Training Command, which approved the start of training in December, said it believed the training system was performing adequately and should continue.

Lockheed, the prime contractor on the F-35 program, said it agreed with the Air Force's decision to start training pilots on the F-35, and said it was confident that the service was able to conduct safe and effective flight training operations.

It said it would continue to refine the operating and tactical procedures for the jet as needed.

Joe DellaVedova, spokesman for the Pentagon's F-35 program office, said Gilmore's latest report was based on the Air Force's report about its evaluation, which had found no reason to hold off on training experienced pilots to fly the new plane.

He said the Air Force and F-35 program office already knew about the issues raised in the report and were working to resolve them.

Northrop Grumman Corp (NOC.N: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz) and Britain's BAE Systems (BAES.L: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz) are key subcontractors on the plane. United Technologies Corp's (UTX.N: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz) Pratt & Whitney unit supplies the engine for the single-seat, single-engine F-35.

(Editing by Lisa Shumaker)

[GDS_Starfury]

something about the term 'water activated ejection system' doesnt sit right.
nor does not being lightning strike certified in a plane with so much emphasis on electronics.

[LongBlade]

Reading through that article is like a comedy of errors.

I'd like to think that it's created as disinformation to throw off the Chinese.

But I can't make myself take that theory seriously.

[eyebiter]

Perhaps it's time to adopt the 'fly before buy' policy the US abandoned during the Vietnam War.

We can no longer afford to buy the most expensive aircraft in history, then spend billions more over the next decade trying to fix all the problems with it.

[Steelgrave]

That is quite the damning report, yet I'm in no way surprised that the Air Force bureaucracy is pushing ahead with the plane. It's the variation of the "build it and they will come" philosophy. Keep digging the hole deeper, train personnel for a plane that is perhaps fatally flawed, polish the brass and add on more chrome, divide the spoils between as many bases/congressional districts as possible. Fighter planes are sexy.

[MIGMaster]

I think that the aerospace market needs a good shake-up. Maybe they should follow the new space exploration model and look at new private companies or ventures. I suspect Richard Branson could build one hell of a fighter! All the big companies like Boeing and Lockheed are so integrated with and dependent on gov't that they are effectively ineffective.

[LongBlade]

I suspect there's almost a quorum here to put together a privately created fighter.

Of course we'd face out own challenges. Like arguing over whether it should also be able to go underwater and if a zeppelin aircraft carrier is really, really, really necessary to deploy it.

[GDS_Starfury]

no zepplins.

[Windigo]

I suspect there's almost a quorum here to put together a privately created fighter.

Of course we'd face out own challenges. Like arguing over whether it should also be able to go underwater and if a zeppelin aircraft carrier is really, really, really necessary to deploy it.

if it fires steam powered rockets with warheads loaded with victoria secret models.... I am in

[Staggerwing]

no zepplins.

That looks like something from a Tom Swift novel.

[GDS_Starfury]

IIRC it was an actual Lockheed proposal.

[MIGMaster]

I had no idea Tom Swift worked for Lockheed !   He always was a bright kid.