"2007 saw the completion of the critical design review for the F-35C. The completion of CDR is a sign that each F-35 variant is "mature and ready for production."
Here are some other news items from 4 years ago.
F-35 Completes Design Review For Future Pilot Training
The Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II has successfully completed its Pilot Training System Critical Design Review (CDR), a significant development milestone that verifies the design maturity of the pilot training system and its subcomponents. The review, conducted by Lockheed Martin's Simulation and Support in Orlando, included representatives from the Joint Strike Fighter Program Office, the F-35 contractor team, members of the U.S. military services and the F-35 international partner services.
F-35 Navy Version Undergoes Successful Design Review, Readies For Production
The U.S. Navy's F-35C Lightning II carrier variant has completed its Air System Critical Design Review (CDR), a significant development milestone that verifies the design maturity of the aircraft and its associated systems. The review was conducted June 18-22 at Lockheed Martin in Fort Worth, and involved officials from Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR), the Joint Strike Fighter Program Office, the F-35 international-participant nations and the F-35 contractor team. Completion of the CDR is a prerequisite for the F-35C to move into Low Rate Initial Production.
"We're pleased with the CDR results, which reinforce our confidence in the F-35C's design," said Dan Crowley, Lockheed Martin executive vice president and F-35 program manager. "The review highlighted the program's development progress and the 5th generation capabilities that the carrier variant will bring to the Navy."
"Completion of this design review is a very significant milestone -- the die is now fully cast for the unique, three-variant Joint Strike Fighter program envisioned when the planning began in the late 1990s," said JSF Program Executive Officer Brig. Gen. C.R. Davis. "This is a momentous day never seen in another acquisition program in history. The entire team should be proud of the work that got us here today."
F-35 Navy Version Undergoes Successful Design Review, Readies For Production
Terry Harrell, Lockheed Martin director of F-35 carrier variant development, added, "We met our objectives for detailed design and performance while removing more than 200 pounds from the aircraft in the past seven months -- a major accomplishment. Getting the design ready for this important milestone required tremendous teamwork among NAVAIR, the Joint Strike Fighter Program Office, Air Force Materiel Command's Aeronautical Systems Center and the entire JSF contractor team."
Hmmm. Then F-35C CDR needed to loose 200 pounds of weight and it was described as a "major accomplishment". Today, weight margins on all variants are thin and some have the brass to say there is "growth room" in the design.
Given this not all-inclusive summary of F-35 problems, it is hard to believe that such formerly competent organisations such as NAVAIR and USAF AFMC aero systems and others did their homework with the F-35. Or they did and those that raised flags were ignored. Or, NAVAIR and USAF AFMC aero systems and others have been dumbed down over the years to be incompetent? Odd, when you consider it was Venlet in his old job in NAVAIR who stated O&S costs of the F-35 were going to be higher than legacy. This goes against all of the rabid F-35 marketing hype. So I will go with the theory that concerns of some of those people who raised flags in CDR were covered up.
(-click image to make larger)
The image above: One of the many things CDR missed; a serious engineering flaw of placement of the tail-hook on the jet. The F-35C recently failed all of its roll tests with the hook. This will require a complete redesign to find a suitable place on the airframe to locate the hook. Not trivial.
This is especially interesting to the U.S. Navy. The current F-35C design will not get aboard an aircraft carrier. Also bad; the UK MOD just shifted from one faulty version of the F-35 (the B STOVL) to this F-35C carrier variant. What qualified carrier aircraft will the UK put on their new and troubled aircraft carriers when they (if they) see service?
8 comments:
If it ever gets to the boat, the F-35C JSF will be a "bolter queen".
Now, in keeping with the approach of "a total indifference to what is real" that is the hallmark of the JSF Program, let's muse on what LM will do "going forward" on the Tail Hook issues and problems:
1. The down load damper force will be increased to the point that the hook stays as firmly on the ground as they can make possible.
2. The point of the hook will be flattened and sharpened.
3. In 2012, the run in tests will be repeated at Lakehurst and will be used to declare the re-design a success but most likely won't mention the increased risk of cable shredding by the now much sharper hook or that the hook gets even sharper due to it running along the deck under the higher down load force of the damper.
4. Actual (as opposed to simulated) FPCL approaches will then be flown; the fact that the jet is a bolter queen will be confirmed; and; it will be back to the drawing board having wasted about 12 months spruiking "a total indifference to what is real".
We have seen these sorts of behaviours in this program all before.
QED.
I know we are the only ones that worry about this stuff, although I don't consider myself antiF35. I think we need it, just I am pissed as hell as it has been such a poorly managed program.
Anyways, has anybody worried or seriously looked into how this fighter will evolve past these problems, especially in terms of weight???? The LWF F16 started as a program for a fighter for around 20,000 pounds.
F16A early blocks:16,285 pounds empty, 25,281 pounds combat, 37,500 pounds maximum takeoff.
F16C Block50/52:18,238 pounds empty, 26,463 pounds normal loaded (air-to-air mission), 42,300 pounds maximum takeoff.
F16E/F:around 22,000 pounds empty, 29,000 pounds normal loaded (air-to-air mission), 46,000 pounds maximum takeoff.
These numbers were pulled from F16.net, I figure they are pretty accurate. So what happens to our beloved F35 over the years and it gains weight??? This program is talking in terms of saving a few pounds here and there, that's sure isn't going to be enough over 20 or 30 years!
I suppose this means that the USN is looking at a new "Tail Hook" scandal! Sorry couldn't resist.
As for the RN and it's self inflicted woes. I think the sight of Rafale's on the decks of the QE class look more likely with each passing flaw and month.
The CDR was pre-conceived to receive a pass, nothing more nothing less. Because the Program would eventually be successful, it was only logical then that the CDR would be part of the process and road map to achieving success. Pass first, then justify later via normal Program design fixes.
By the time FRP ever kicked in anyway, the deciders of passing CDR would likely be long gone, thus giving a clean slate to anyone making corrective actions to the Program down the road as needed.
Basically... passing CDR was a requisite to achieving too-big-to-fail status and achieving TBTF status was requisite of achieving all necessary Program fixes down the road to become a successful Program, as there will be no Plan B available.
A programme like JSF really makes me ask why the U.S. maintains the fiction of private defense companies. Either drop export controls and allow them to sell who ever puts money on the barrelhead, or nationalize the bunch.
Agree with Anon above. The "critical" in CDR was a farce.
The tail hook probably will be redesign, made longer, and will be covered or made for some very expensive anti radar coating. (unless they are insane enough trying to come up with folding/telescoping hook. then it's even more expensive)
the hook problem will only become expensive if it breaks the "stealth" characteristic.
My biggest question is still that "crack" in the bulk head and wing join. That is a big deal. It means thy don't understand very well how the new material behaves. If they keep hiding this, when they don't actually know what's wrong, it will become expensive and fatal flaw later on. Things that can't be fixed without gross overweight.
It difficult to see how the tail hook issue can be easily resolved and I think Horde's scenario looks very likely.
The lower fuselage and rear profile is already a RCS disaster so what's the big deal with adding just one more hotspot with a semi-functional non-stealthy tail hook?
The QLR answers the question about the DAB, like why haven't they had it? The reason is now clear, If they had a DAB the F-35 would fail it and they would have to stop producing LRIP jets. Why do they need hundreds of non-representative non-combat worthly LRIP jets with concurrency problems? No one have ever explained that except to say building mistake jets helps lower the unit price later in production (I suspect mostly for foreign buyers).
With the tailhook problems, lack of internal payload, and mission related classified problems The Navy should seriously consider bailing on this loser program.
Post a Comment