F-35 Purchase Cancelled; CF-18 replacement process begins

[Smallc]

You're making far more out of a development issue than you need to. This is normal, especially for a cutting edge aircraft.

[On Guard for Thee]

What is troubling is they re-designed the engine back in '08 due to the same problems that still show up.

[waldo]

You're making far more out of a development issue than you need to. This is normal, especially for a cutting edge aircraft.

after a decade+, at what point does... development end?

[waldo]

Nothing systemic

"We don't see at this point what I call a systemic problem," said Frank Kendall, the Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics.

huh! That seems quite definitive... and at odds with yesterday's comment from the USN's Vice Admiral David Dunaway, head of the Navy's Air Systems Command:

... but there was still "no discernible event that represents a root cause."

.

[Derek 2.0]

huh! That seems quite definitive... and at odds with yesterday's comment from the USN's Vice Admiral David Dunaway, head of the Navy's Air Systems Command:

.

Reread your source………said comment by the Admiral was actually a leaked (to Reuters) internal NAVAIR memo, and occurred on the 3rd of July………

[waldo]

Reread your source………said comment by the Admiral was actually a leaked (to Reuters) internal NAVAIR memo, and occurred on the 3rd of July………

no - you reread what you think is my source. The July 3rd reference is with regard to the initial grounding announcement. The USN Admiral's comment relates to an update on that July 3rd reference... an update relative to Friday's July 11th meeting of, "the officials responsible for determining the "airworthiness" of the F-35"

[Derek 2.0]

no - you reread what you think is my source. The July 3rd reference is with regard to the initial grounding announcement. The USN Admiral's comment relates to an update on that July 3rd reference... an update relative to Friday's July 11th meeting of, "the officials responsible for determining the "airworthiness" of the F-35"

No, the statement was from July 3rd......

"At this time, I do not have sufficient information to return the F-35B and F-35C fleet to flight," Vice Admiral David Dunaway, who heads the Navy's Air Systems Command, said in an update to a fleetwide grounding order issued by U.S. officials on July 3. A copy of the document was obtained by Reuters.

Dunaway said in the document that he was committed to returning the F-35 fleet to flight as soon as possible, but there was "no discernible event that represents a root cause."

[waldo]

No, the statement was from July 3rd......

are you sure? The initial grounding announcement was July 3rd... the recent comment was an update on that July 3rd announcement... again, an update associated with the Friday July 11th meeting:

"At this time, I do not have sufficient information to return the F-35B and F-35C fleet to flight," Vice Admiral David Dunaway, who heads the Navy's Air Systems Command, said in an update.... [waldo: there's an update here] to a grounding order [waldo: and it's an update to the grounding order] issued by U.S. officials on July 3 [waldo: the grounding order that was originally announced on July 3rd]. A copy of the document was obtained by Reuters.

In the document, Dunaway said he was committed to returning the F-35 fleet to flight as soon as possible, but there was still "no discernible event that represents a root cause."

The memo emerged after a lengthy meeting on Friday of the officials responsible for determining the "airworthiness" of the F-35, according to sources familiar with the matter.

[Derek 2.0]

are you sure? The initial grounding announcement was July 3rd... the recent comment was an update on that July 3rd announcement... again, an update associated with the Friday July 11th meeting:

The quoted passage from the Vice Admiral was from his memo that grounded the Navy and Marine fleets on the 3rd, at that time, it was not known if the problem was systemic or a one off incident.

Said dated quote would bare no context to the determination of Friday’s meeting, which as relayed by the civilian head of the program today, has indicated the problem was likely unique to the sole engine in question and shared (minor) characteristics also found in several other engines…….namely the rubbing of blades in the low pressure compressor.

The next official update will be on the 16th, of which I expect, the grounding to be lifted or an exemption granted to the Marine aircraft.

[On Guard for Thee]

Hopefully not before discovering the "discernable event"

[On Guard for Thee]

Down at the bottom of this is a list of the ongoing engine problems through history.

http://www.jsfnieuws.nl/?p=1224

[Smallc]

after a decade+, at what point does... development end?

When the aircraft enters full scale production and becomes operational - in about 18 months for the B model.

[On Guard for Thee]

Assuming the engines stop blowing up. Oops, I made a grammatical error, that should read: assuming the engine stops blowing up.

[Smallc]

We get it - it has one engine...like the most successful fighter ever built (the F-16). It has problems, like every other fighter in history....cool.

[On Guard for Thee]

Unfortunately it's not just the engine. Yhe HUD doesn't work, it's not stealthy, the software has been hacked, and it won't live up to it's performance numbers. So they just re-jigged the performance numbers. How oftern can they get away with that before eyebrows get raised?

[bush_cheney2004]

F-18C engine fire on the USS Carl Vinson in 2011...good trap...bad fire.

[On Guard for Thee]

F-18C engine fire on the USS Carl Vinson in 2011...good trap...bad fire.

Too bad they won't release the videos of the F 35 on fire. I bet they have a number of them!

[On Guard for Thee]

Too bad they won't release the videos of the F 35 on fire. I bet they have a number of them!

This latest one out of Elgin with engine parts exploding through the airframe is probably quite exciting.

[waldo]

When the aircraft enters full scale production and becomes operational - in about 18 months for the B model.

ah yes, the much politicized IOC dates! Tell me, do you think it makes any sense to declare any plane... any plane... operational, before testing it is complete... before the full intended LRIP cycles are complete?... before all prior planes have been brought current (i.e. gone through the respective updates necessary to bring them current)?

.

[waldo]

The quoted passage from the Vice Admiral was from his memo that grounded the Navy and Marine fleets on the 3rd, at that time, it was not known if the problem was systemic or a one off incident.

Said dated quote would bare no context to the determination of Friday’s meeting, which as relayed by the civilian head of the program today, has indicated the problem was likely unique to the sole engine in question and shared (minor) characteristics also found in several other engines…….namely the rubbing of blades in the low pressure compressor.

The next official update will be on the 16th, of which I expect, the grounding to be lifted or an exemption granted to the Marine aircraft.

says you! And since when is Kendall now, as you say, "the civilian head of the program"? Given this latest quote where he states, "but does not appear to be a fundamental design flaw", your stated expectation seems a tad optimistic, yes? After all, the pressure to appear at the British airshows is off... everyone knows the planes won't appear... it's just not being stated officially.

[Derek 2.0]

says you! And since when is Kendall now, as you say, "the civilian head of the program"? Given this latest quote where he states, "but does not appear to be a fundamental design flaw", your stated expectation seems a tad optimistic, yes? After all, the pressure to appear at the British airshows is off... everyone knows the planes won't appear... it's just not being stated officially.

Kendall’s importance as USD (AT&L) should be obvious……..As to optimism, from the information released to date, I see no reason to believe different……As to the flight to the United Kingdom, from the report I linked earlier, it stated that the aircraft would miss the opening, but could still participate later this week, with such determination being made in the next several days.

Edited July 14, 2014 by Derek 2.0

[On Guard for Thee]

Kendall’s importance as USD (AT&L) should be obvious……..As to optimism, from the information released to date, I see no reason to believe different……As to the flight to the United Kingdom, from the report I linked earlier, it stated that the aircraft would miss the opening, but could still participate later this week, with such determination being made in the next several days.

They only have 6 days until the show is over.

[waldo]

Kendall’s importance as USD (AT&L) should be obvious……

of course he's important... that's obviously why I've made several past (and recent) post references to what he has to say. You know, like the recent post where you took exception to his statements about the lack of F-35 parts reliability. In any case, you just skirted over my challenge to you labeling him the "civilian head of the program"... carry on!

[Derek 2.0]

ah yes, the much politicized IOC dates! Tell me, do you think it makes any sense to declare any plane... any plane... operational, before testing it is complete... before the full intended LRIP cycles are complete?... before all prior planes have been brought current (i.e. gone through the respective updates necessary to bring them current)?

.

The current process for legacy aircraft has seen large improvements at various stages of a given aircraft‘s life, spawned by the various operators……this translates into upgrades to existing aircraft (Our Hornet upgrade for example) or new production variants (F/A-18 C&D).

Where this will differ with the F-35, is that the aircraft will be continually upgraded, to a same standard for all users and financed by all operators based on a proportional level based on their given fleet size.

[Derek 2.0]

of course he's important... that's obviously why I've made several past (and recent) post references to what he has to say. You know, like the recent post where you took exception to his statements about the lack of F-35 parts reliability. In any case, you just skirted over my challenge to you labeling him the "civilian head of the program"... carry on!

So you call into question his statement over the F-35’s current status…….or not?