When Will the F-35 Get Airborne Again?

When Will the F-35 Get Airborne Again?
Aviation Week's DTI | Douglas Barrie | December 03, 2007

Following an enforced six-month lay-off, Lockheed Martin is "champing at the bit" to get the F-35 Lightning II back into the air, an ambition it is aiming to fulfil this week.

As of the end of last month company officials were targeting Dec. 4 to restart flight trials of AA-1, an F-35A. The aircraft has been on the ground since May, initially as a result of an electrical problem, and latterly with engine issues.

The planned return of the AA-1 to the flight test program will be quickly followed by flight tests of company's Boeing 737 systems testbed-aircraft, the Cooperative Avionics Testbed (CATBird). The CATBird was slated to fly as early as Dec. 5. The aircraft will eventually be fitted with a complete F-35 sensor suite.

Tom Burbage, Lockheed Martin vice-president and F-35 general manager, says the circuitry responsible for the electrical problem has been redesigned. This delay, however, was compounded by a "manufacturing defect in an engine blade" resulting in the need for checks to the Pratt & Whitney F-135 engine.

Aircraft AA-1 had been flown on 19 test-flights when the electrical issue was encountered, May 3. A successful return to flight this week would see the aircraft go on to be flown from Forth Worth through March 2008, when it would be transferred to Edwards AFB, Calif. for a series of trials lasting around a month.

The initial AA-1 flights will be used to examine whether the electrical arcing issue at high-altitude has been satisfactorily dealt with. The aircraft will be flown at various flight levels up to 40,000 feet to ensure the anomaly does not recur.


Rest of article at: http://www.military.com/features/0,15240,157464,00.html



uhc comment: No wonder Lockeed Martin is hot to trot on the F-35.

F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) Lightning II

JSF is a joint, multinational acquisition program for the Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps, and eight cooperative international partners. Expected to be the largest military aircraft procurement ever, the stealth, supersonic F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (F-35) will replace a wide range of aging fighter and strike aircraft for the U.S. Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps and allied defense forces worldwide. The program’s hallmark is affordability achieved through a high degree of aircraft commonality among three variants: conventional takeoff/landing (CTOL), carrier variant (CV) and short takeoff/vertical landing (STOVL) aircraft. Innovative concepts and advanced technologies will significantly reduce weapon system life-cycle costs while meeting the strike weapon system requirements of military customers. Procurement is planned to continue through 2026 and possibly beyond. JSF aircraft may well stay in service until 2060 or longer.

The program began in November 1996 with a 5-year competition between Lockheed Martin and Boeing to determine the most capable and affordable preliminary aircraft design. On 26 October 2001 the Pentagon announced that Lockheed-Martin had won the largest military contract ever, a possible $200 billion competition to build the Joint Strike Fighter. Air Force Secretary Jim Roche said on the basis of strengths, weaknesses and degrees of risk of the program that the Lockheed-Martin team was the winner on a "best- value" basis. He said Lockheed-Martin was a clear winner over the team led by Boeing. Total cost of the contract to enter the systems development and demonstration phase is $19 billion. Pratt and Whitney has a $4 billion contract to design and build propulsion systems for the craft. The British will contribute $2 billion to the program.


F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) Lightning II Program

F-35/JSF production totals are more likely to be in the 2,000-3,000 aircraft range than the 4,000-5,000 or 6,000 sometimes cited. Foreign partners have expressed intent to buy about 700 aircraft between 2012 and 2015, but no formal agreements have been signed as of early 2005.

In 1996 the program included 2,978 aircraft for the US: 2,036 for the Air Force, 642 for the Marines, 300 for the US Navy, as well as another 60 for the Royal Navy. The May 1997 QDR reduced procurement for the US to 2,852: 1,763 for the Air Force, 609 for the Marines, and up to 480 for the Navy. The 1997 QDR noted that up to 230 of the Navy's 480 JSFs could be replaced by F/A-18E/Fs, depending on the progress of the JSF program and the price of its Navy variant compared to the F/A-18E/F.

As of 2001 the first operational Joint Strike Fighter, re-designated as the F-35, was scheduled for delivery in fiscal 2008. A total of 2,852 planes were scheduled for delivery starting in 2008 for the US Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps, and a small number to the British Royal Navy. Other nations interested in participating in the program include the Netherlands, Belgium and Norway. The requirements of 1,763 strike fighters for the Air Force, 609 for the Marine Corps and 480 for the Navy had held steady since the 1997 Quadrennial Defense Review.

As of 2001 program estimates peg the recurring JSF unit flyaway costs at $37 million for the Air Force conventional takeoff and landing variant, $46 million for the Marine Corps short takeoff vertical landing variant and $48 million for the Navy carrier version, in 2002 dollars.


Ooops -> F-35's costs climb along with concerns

Posted on: Apr. 24th, 2006 || Source: aimpoints.hq.af.mil

The maiden flight of the first F-35 joint strike fighter prototype is still months away, and Lockheed Martin's giant development program is already generating budget-busting headlines.

Pentagon officials, in their most recent estimate of major weapons system costs, projected a $276.5 billion cost for developing the F-35 and purchasing 2,500 of the planes for the U.S. and British armed forces.

That’s $20 billion more than the last estimate, in January 2004, and about a $75 billion increase since the program was launched in October 2001.

Skeptics in and out of government fear that it may not be the last big cost increase because the F-35 is still in its infancy and much remains to be done to develop and perfect the warplane’s high-tech systems.


Taxpayers may pay big F-35 costs
By BOB COX
Star-Telegram Staff Writer

Foreign nations are in no rush to place orders for Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II fighter jets, and that threatens to push the planes' rising cost even higher and shrink future orders.

The result is that one way or another U.S. taxpayers will likely shoulder most of the cost of getting the F-35 into production, with the bulk of foreign orders not coming until years from now, when jet prices will have dropped dramatically.

Lockheed and the Pentagon have been talking with representatives of the eight nations that have contributed $4 billion-plus to the Lightning II program about placing early orders for production in 2011-13, but the high price is a deterrent.

~snip~

The problem is simple economics.

As production begins, each of the relatively few airplanes built is enormously expensive. Prices fall as more planes are made.

The Pentagon's 2008 budget contains about $2.8 billion for the Air Force and Marines to buy six F-35s each. That's about $233 million a plane, compared with $50 million for a modern F-16.

As of late March 2002 the Pentagon was reviewing a proposal to cut JSF production by 400 aircraft and limit the Navy's F/A-18E/F acquisition to 460 aircraft versus 548. The JSF reductions, which could be split about equally between the Marine Corps STOVL and the Navy's carrier versions, would reduce the total buy to about 2,600.


In all fairness, it's cheaper than the F-22 Raptor at $330,000,000 a pop. You know, the Raptor that is in the shop for corrosion repairs.

the VTOL version has a big hole in the middle, which through an incredibly complex and delicate system of gears, power take off systems, and many many thousands of parts (which wear out something awful) allows the main engine power a rotor that allows vertical take off.

Note the repeated use of the term "delicate". This is a warplane. It needs to be robust, to deal with Iraqi and Siberian conditions. It needs to have long legs, and carry its own weight. the F-35B fails on many scores.

From what I've heard it could do everything that the Harrier could do-even 'viff'. And it was just as simple and robust. It just looked funny (and that could have easily been corrected). The Lockheed version can't even do half that plus as one here stated is very complex. So to me it's nothing more than an americanized version of a russian jump jet.