U.S. F-35 program could be on chopping block

[Wilber]

Another couple of partial strawmen…….look at the location of the intakes on a modern fighter, be it a Hornet or Eurofighter for example, both relatively close, so flying through a flock of birds, there is a good possibility of “ingesting” birds in one or both intakes and affecting both engines……Also, bird strikes, tend to occur at relatively lower levels of flight, namely landing and takeoff…….

You would think a comparison study between twin and single engine fighters would have been done regarding aircraft losses due to engine failure and taken into account when making the decision to buy the F-35. Today's jet engines are incredibly reliable and failures are rare. Currently, twin engine airliners are allowed to be up to 180 minutes from an airport when flying over water and up to 240 minutes on a case by case basis. Boeing is planing on certifying the B787 for 330 minutes and Airbus the A350 to 350 minutes. We'll see.

As you say, if a flock of birds is encountered, damage to more than one engine is likely as Sully found out. An acquaintance of mine flying a B737 hit a flock taking off in Calgary years ago. One engine failed and the other was damaged. Luckily it was scheduled to be a short leg and the aircraft was fairly light so they made it around the circuit and landed safely.

Todays twin engine fighters also have their engines mounted very close together. An uncontained failure of one engine could quite possibly damage the other.

[Guest Derek L]

You would think a comparison study between twin and single engine fighters would have been done regarding aircraft losses due to engine failure and taken into account when making the decision to buy the F-35. Today's jet engines are incredibly reliable and failures are rare. Currently, twin engine airliners are allowed to be up to 180 minutes from an airport when flying over water and up to 240 minutes on a case by case basis. Boeing is planing on certifying the B787 for 330 minutes and Airbus the A350 to 350 minutes. We'll see.

As you say, if a flock of birds is encountered, damage to more than one engine is likely as Sully found out. An acquaintance of mine flying a B737 hit a flock taking off in Calgary years ago. One engine failed and the other was damaged. Luckily it was scheduled to be a short leg and the aircraft was fairly light so they made it around the circuit and landed safely.

Todays twin engine fighters also have their engines mounted very close together. An uncontained failure of one engine could quite possibly damage the other.

I agree, one of our first CF-18 losses back in the 80s, incurred on takeoff when the port engine caught fire….luckily the pilot ejected…..but the majority of our Hornet losses are attributed to pilot error, and I assume safely, this is the case with most of our NATO allies.

[Moonbox]

No...Viet-Nam was a war between two seperate states and a proxy war between Seato and the Warsaw Pact.

Bingo. Wyly, maybe you don't understand what proxy means???

[Wilber]

I agree, one of our first CF-18 losses back in the 80s, incurred on takeoff when the port engine caught fire….luckily the pilot ejected…..but the majority of our Hornet losses are attributed to pilot error, and I assume safely, this is the case with most of our NATO allies.

Yup, if you are on fire and can't put it out, it doesn't matter how many engines you have.

[William Ashley]

Yup, if you are on fire and can't put it out, it doesn't matter how many engines you have.

I'm sorry but if you are buying aircraft succeptable to birdstrike and burnout you are morons. If I can design systems to prevent this then md should be able to

Edited November 22, 2011 by William Ashley

[grogy]

I'm sorry but if you are buying aircraft succeptable to birdstrike and burnout you are morons. If I can design systems to prevent this then md should be able to

All aircraft are susceptible to bird strikes.

[Guest Derek L]

All aircraft are susceptible to bird strikes.

Why did you get him started……he’s going to outline his plans for a nuclear powered Zeppelin, crewed by gibbons and Atlanteans.....

Edited November 22, 2011 by Derek L

[Bonam]

Why did you get him started……he’s going to outline his plans for a nuclear powered Zeppelin, crewed by gibbons and Atlanteans.....

Or battle gliders launched from a space elevator (seriously, we had that discussion... )

Edited November 22, 2011 by Bonam

[Wilber]

I'm sorry but if you are buying aircraft succeptable to birdstrike and burnout you are morons. If I can design systems to prevent this then md should be able to

[olp1fan]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/initial-f-35-jets-could-be-unable-to-track-troops-talk-to-older-planes/article2245111/

The first dozen or so F-35s slated to arrive in Canada won't be equipped with software that allows the stealth fighters to communicate with ground forces, a feature designed to prevent incidents of friendly fire.

The initial operating system also won't be equipped with a program that helps the fighters communicate with older aircraft, such as the Air Force's Aurora surveillance planes.

The software isn't expected to be added until an upgrade program is introduced in 2019 – three years after the Royal Canadian Air Force begins taking delivery the advanced multi-role fighter.

[DogOnPorch]

The Hawker Hurricane came with none of that. Perhaps they should have been grounded for the BoB.

[Guest Derek L]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/initial-f-35-jets-could-be-unable-to-track-troops-talk-to-older-planes/article2245111/

The first dozen or so F-35s slated to arrive in Canada won't be equipped with software that allows the stealth fighters to communicate with ground forces, a feature designed to prevent incidents of friendly fire.

The initial operating system also won't be equipped with a program that helps the fighters communicate with older aircraft, such as the Air Force's Aurora surveillance planes.

The software isn't expected to be added until an upgrade program is introduced in 2019 – three years after the Royal Canadian Air Force begins taking delivery the advanced multi-role fighter.

See two pages back:

Derek L doesn't need a press release to know the facts about the F-35

From 19 November 2011 - 04:44 PM:

Indeed the JSF, like the Super Hornet and our current Hornets were upgraded with, is equipped with the Link 16 tactical data link package, which is today’s benchmark…….What the “perceived controversy” is over, is that, Link 22, which will complement Link 16 and enable a more secure and stealth form of communication, and more importantly, vastly improve the transfer of information, both in terms of rate and volume……It won’t be fully fielded until later this decade on the F-35 (and F-22 & B-2)….And as was just noted in the media, the last squadron of Hornets (425 TFS) won’t convert to CF-35s until the early 2020s……What do you want to bet, 425 squadron, will be fulfilling our NORAD NORPATS during this time…

[William Ashley]

it still irks me that israel is getting 55 of these for 2 billion while canada is paying many times more than that

http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Security-Industry/2011/11/18/Israel-has-fingers-crossed-on-F-35-deal/UPI-78011321632382/?spt=hs∨=si

that less than 37 mil a peice canada is paying 4+X than amount.. and Canada is a air defence partner of the US in Norad

Edited December 3, 2011 by William Ashley

[be real]

Are you serious? I was happy with the Canada we had before him. this is no longer Canada, its Harperland

what is to like about him? for crying out loud his photo ops are of him cuddling his kitten with a fake smile in front of a fireplace

that is just creepy

why do I not like Harper? He is an evangelical ideologue ...you could support something with all kinds of evidence and he's like ...no, we're doing it my way, his government is one of the most corrupt in the past 50 years... I'm sure he'd let Tony Clement and John Baird get away with murder if it meant he'd keep his government

Need I go on more?

Harper is a poor democrat and that is why he isn't one. He attracts the lesser ideals of our people, sad but true, he is very good manipulator and propogandist. His poor soul is so twisted and tormented by who knows what and the lack of compramise he offers is offensive. Why the Cons have glommed onto the F-35 to patrol the far north is anyones guess, mabey they feel the Russians are going to wage an air to air combat war with us. I wonder what there plan B is? None?

[Wilber]

That Israeli article isn't clear. It links 2.75B to the first 20 which would be 137M a piece or almost exactly the same as the Canadian deal. It also doesn't specify what the contract includes over and above the cost of the aircraft themselves.

Edited December 4, 2011 by Wilber

[Guest Derek L]

it still irks me that israel is getting 55 of these for 2 billion while canada is paying many times more than that

http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Security-Industry/2011/11/18/Israel-has-fingers-crossed-on-F-35-deal/UPI-78011321632382/?spt=hs∨=si

that less than 37 mil a peice canada is paying 4+X than amount.. and Canada is a air defence partner of the US in Norad

Read the article you linked :

The Jerusalem Post reported that defense chiefs do not believe that U.S plans to put back the F-35's initial operational deployment because of the development problems will affect the delivery of 20 of the jets Israel ordered in October 2010 under a $2.75 billion deal.

[Guest Derek L]

That Israeli article isn't clear. It links 2.75B to the first 20 which would be 137M a piece or almost exactly the same as the Canadian deal. It also doesn't specify what the contract includes over and above the cost of the aircraft themselves.

Exactly..........You factor the per plane cost into the Israeli figure, and use said figure compared to our purchase of 65, and both deals roughly mirror each other…….

[be real]

Without trying to offend anyone, what are the plans for Canadas new air fleet? To be a half ass loser democracy picking cherry fights after Americans whipe out any air to air or serious ground to air resistance? What will we be but little men looking for a fight we can win with our tough new toys. Why? What will we use our new planes for? I hope they serve us well and don't become penis extenions for our egos. Would our money and energy be better spent elswhere? There are many canadian missions now that could use money and energy more than we need a fleet of F-35. We ignore genocide but need new planes?

Why? Why? Why? We're not protecting the north with F-35s, That's ridiculaus. Even if you are hell bent on these planes, stop and pretend for just a moment that this money went elswhere. It is a s-------d of money! We could rebuild Haiti! Hell we could fix our colonial reservation system and we could use our proud Canadian military. The good guys.

[Guest Derek L]

Without trying to offend anyone, what are the plans for Canadas new air fleet? To be a half ass loser democracy picking cherry fights after Americans whipe out any air to air or serious ground to air resistance? What will we be but little men looking for a fight we can win with our tough new toys. Why? What will we use our new planes for? I hope they serve us well and don't become penis extenions for our egos. Would our money and energy be better spent elswhere? There are many canadian missions now that could use money and energy more than we need a fleet of F-35. We ignore genocide but need new planes?

Why? Why? Why? We're not protecting the north with F-35s, That's ridiculaus. Even if you are hell bent on these planes, stop and pretend for just a moment that this money went elswhere. It is a s-------d of money! We could rebuild Haiti! Hell we could fix our colonial reservation system and we could use our proud Canadian military. The good guys.

Above you stated:

Harper is a poor democrat and that is why he isn't one. He attracts the lesser ideals of our people, sad but true, he is very good manipulator and propogandist. His poor soul is so twisted and tormented by who knows what and the lack of compramise he offers is offensive. Why the Cons have glommed onto the F-35 to patrol the far north is anyones guess, mabey they feel the Russians are going to wage an air to air combat war with us. I wonder what there plan B is? None?

Our involvement in the JSF program started under PM Chrétien........Since you labelled PM Harper of being a "very good manipulator and propogandist", I'm forced to ask, what’s your game? Propaganda or ignorance?

If you want a real discussion on the requirements of the RCAF, let’s define the parameters of said discussion first.

[wyly]

it just keeps getting better now cracks in the airframe...

In an interview with AOL Defense published Thursday, U.S. Vice-Admiral David Venlet said Pentagon officials were surprised by the extent of the problems discovered in the fighter's structure during recent testing.

"The analyzed hot spots that have arisen in the last 12 months or so in the program have surprised us at the amount of change and at the cost," Venlet said.

"Most of them are little ones, but when you bundle them all up and package them and look at where they are in the airplane and how hard they are to get at after you buy the jet, the cost burden of that is what sucks the wind out of your lungs."

Read more: http://www.canada.com/news/Cracks+airframe+latest+hurdle/5804130/story.html#ixzz1fbolQ1p9

[Smallc]

Every aircraft program goes through this.

[William Ashley]

Exactly..........You factor the per plane cost into the Israeli figure, and use said figure compared to our purchase of 65, and both deals roughly mirror each other…….

Dude, 3x the price is not similar you are talking about atleast a 150 million dollar per plane price variation that means Israel can get 2 jets for evey jet canada buys

I hope you don't believe what you are saying

this is the difference Israeli versions are modifiable... canadian versions arn't -- who got the better deal?

F-35A

The F-35A is the conventional takeoff and landing (CTOL) variant intended for the US Air Force and other air forces. It is the smallest, lightest F-35 version and is the only variant equipped with an internal cannon, the GAU-22/A. This 25 mm cannon is a development of the GAU-12 carried by the USMC's AV-8B Harrier II. It is designed for increased effectiveness against ground targets compared to the 20 mm M61 Vulcan cannon carried by other USAF fighters.

The F-35A is expected to match the F-16 in maneuverability and instantaneous and sustained high-g performance, and outperform it in stealth, payload, range on internal fuel, avionics, operational effectiveness, supportability, and survivability.[250] It is expected to match an F-16 that is carrying the usual external fuel tank in acceleration performance.[251] It also has an internal laser designator and infrared sensors, equivalent to the Sniper XR pod carried by the F-16, but built in to reduce radar cross section.

The A variant is primarily intended to replace the USAF's F-16 Fighting Falcon. It is also to replace the A-10 Thunderbolt II starting in 2028.

F-35I

F-35A with Israeli modifications. A senior Israel air force official stated "the aircraft will be designated F-35I, as there will be unique Israeli features installed in them". The United States will not allow the integration of Israel's own electronic warfare systems into the aircraft’s built-in electronic suite. However, a plug-and-play feature added to the main computer will allow for the use of Israeli electronics in an add-on fashion. Israel will be able to fit its own external jamming pod and plans to install its own air-to-air missiles and guided bombs in the F-35’s internal weapon bays.[254] In July 2011, it was reported that the U.S. had agreed to allow Israel to install their own electronic warfare systems and missiles in their F-35s in the future.[255]

Israel Aerospace Industries has considered playing a role in the development of a proposed two-seat F-35. An IAI executive stated, "There is a known demand for two seats not only from Israel but from other air forces. Advanced aircraft are usually two seats rather than single seats."

the fact the orignal price ballooned more than 200% and was delayed 2+ years is a totally different matter, it is a bitter irony this thing was developed out of the Common Affordable Lightweight Fighter (CALF) and costs more than a raptor

Edited December 5, 2011 by William Ashley

[Guest Derek L]

it just keeps getting better now cracks in the airframe...

This is old news……The said aircraft are prototypes and LRIPs, which had strengthening materials removed to address weight issues on the initial B versions……….And again the slowdown in LRIP aircraft production, from ~50 a year down to ~30 is being done because it won’t be economically sound, as was planned, to bring the prototype aircraft up to production aircraft standards once the remaining flight testing is complete……….And Canada won't be getting any LRIP aircraft

Planned production aircraft delivery rates, starting in a few years won’t be affected.

In other news, the UK won’t be taking possessions of their planned B version LRIP aircraft…..[sarcasm] Surely a sign the UK is having second thoughts [/sarcasm]

Actually, they’re swapping their Bs for Cs

[Guest Derek L]

Dude, 3x the price is not similar you are talking about atleast a 150 million dollar per plane price variation that means Israel can get 2 jets for evey jet canada buys

I hope you don't believe what you are saying

this is the difference Israeli versions are modifiable... canadian versions arn't -- who got the better deal?

F-35A

The F-35A is the conventional takeoff and landing (CTOL) variant intended for the US Air Force and other air forces. It is the smallest, lightest F-35 version and is the only variant equipped with an internal cannon, the GAU-22/A. This 25 mm cannon is a development of the GAU-12 carried by the USMC's AV-8B Harrier II. It is designed for increased effectiveness against ground targets compared to the 20 mm M61 Vulcan cannon carried by other USAF fighters.

The F-35A is expected to match the F-16 in maneuverability and instantaneous and sustained high-g performance, and outperform it in stealth, payload, range on internal fuel, avionics, operational effectiveness, supportability, and survivability.[250] It is expected to match an F-16 that is carrying the usual external fuel tank in acceleration performance.[251] It also has an internal laser designator and infrared sensors, equivalent to the Sniper XR pod carried by the F-16, but built in to reduce radar cross section.

The A variant is primarily intended to replace the USAF's F-16 Fighting Falcon. It is also to replace the A-10 Thunderbolt II starting in 2028.

F-35I

F-35A with Israeli modifications. A senior Israel air force official stated "the aircraft will be designated F-35I, as there will be unique Israeli features installed in them". The United States will not allow the integration of Israel's own electronic warfare systems into the aircraft’s built-in electronic suite. However, a plug-and-play feature added to the main computer will allow for the use of Israeli electronics in an add-on fashion. Israel will be able to fit its own external jamming pod and plans to install its own air-to-air missiles and guided bombs in the F-35’s internal weapon bays.[254] In July 2011, it was reported that the U.S. had agreed to allow Israel to install their own electronic warfare systems and missiles in their F-35s in the future.[255]

Israel Aerospace Industries has considered playing a role in the development of a proposed two-seat F-35. An IAI executive stated, "There is a known demand for two seats not only from Israel but from other air forces. Advanced aircraft are usually two seats rather than single seats."

the fact the orignal price ballooned more than 200% and was delayed 2+ years is a totally different matter, it is a bitter irony this thing was developed out of the Common Affordable Lightweight Fighter (CALF) and costs more than a raptor

Dude, Basic math escapes you………20 aircraft for $2.75 compared to 65 aircraft for $9 billion…..What’s the per plane cost for both?

And why would we want the Israeli “version”? There’s already going to be CanCon in all the production versions……

[William Ashley]

Dude, Basic math escapes you………20 aircraft for $2.75 compared to 65 aircraft for $9 billion…..What’s the per plane cost for both?

And why would we want the Israeli “version”? There’s already going to be CanCon in all the production versions……

because it is obsolete and the israeli version is modifiable

18-24 billion not 9 (that is 1ox the cost for an obsolete non upgradable jet -)

canadas jets dont even come with engines

also how many of those canadian companies arn't owned by american defence firms?

Edited December 5, 2011 by William Ashley