With that, this normalization-of-deviance thinking combined with hope is not what the country needs to have a viable Defence posture. And consider that the UK is a massive entitlement society. Defence gets what it gets after those demanding their benefits (along with their political class) get their annual fief.
Normalization-of-deviance management, killed two space shuttle crews.
The software claims from the post are in error.
Abandon all hope when the lead is this:
Looking at the F35.Com website, the official LM information site;
Which is:
From the program’s outset, the software team has focused on developing six key software releases known as Blocks:
Block 1A/1B – Block 1 comprises 76 percent of the more than 8 million source lines of code required for the F-35’s full warfighting capability. Block 1A was the ready for training configuration while Block 1B provided initial multi-level security.
Block 2A – Block 2A is currently released to the F-35 fleet. It provides enhanced training including functionality for off-board fusion, initial data links, electronic attack and mission debrief. Under Block 2A, nearly 86 percent of the required code for full warfighting capability is flying.
Block 2B – Block 2B provides initial warfighting capabilities, including but not limited to expanded data links, multi-ship fusion and initial live weapons. The U.S. Marines will declare IOC with Block 2B. Under Block 2B, more than 88 percent of the required code for full warfighting capability is flying.
Block 3i – Block 3i provides the same capabilities as Block 2B. The principal difference between 2B and 3i is the implementation of new hardware, specifically the updated Integrated Core Processor. The Air Force will declare IOC with Block 3i. With Block 3i, more than 89 percent of code required for full warfighting capability will fly.
Block 3F – Block 3F provides 100 percent of the software required for full warfighting capability, including but not limited to data link imagery, full weapons and embedded training. Requirements development for Block 3F was completed in June of 2013.
Now the cold water.
Here is what software block plan was in the early days of the program after the UK signed on as a JSF Partner:
(click image to make larger)
And this is what is briefed not all that long ago:
(click image to make larger)
And note the disclaimer in blue. Today? They are struggling to get anything going that represents a real, go-to-war aircraft.
Over 12 years after contract award. For an operational requirement document that was crafted in the 1990's (which assumed there would be hundreds of F-22s to kill the big threats) AND... that threats would be mostly of the broken down ex-Cold War kind with all that entails.
That document was signed off on, at the beginning of the last decade.
LM (and their fan-base) doing revisionist history is not going to help get anyone a useful combat aircraft.
There will be no close air support of meaningful value without a helmet that can cue weapons including...a gun. That system does not work. No one, years ago would have stated that when the F-35 is first deployed, it will need existing legacy aircraft to escort it in order for it to survive anything other than a permissive-air environment.
How someone can infer that things might just work out after taking a look through some of the links at the end of this post is a behavior of denial.
Advocates and critics will take their positions and nothing will change their minds, I tend to think the F35 is the product of the cream of the Western aerospace engineering profession and together, they are unlikely to deliver a pup.
Or, Appeal to Authority. All for an obsolete-to-the-threat, weapon system. We have a lot of talent building the wrong aircraft. That talent needs to be engaged building the right aircraft. And, "Western aerospace" no longer has all the cream, or secret sauce.
The U.K. is at risk of fielding two of the largest ever, helicopter carriers. Where one (or both) ends up being parked.
Money was released to plan and build those ships, based on promises from the F-35 fan-base.
---
-Time's Battleland - 5 Part series on F-35 procurement - 2013
-Summary of Air Power Australia F-35 points
-Aviation Week (ARES blog) F-35 posts (2007 to present)
-U.S. Government Accounting Office (GAO) F-35 reports
-F-35 JSF: Cold War Anachronism Without a Mission
-History of F-35 Production Cuts
-Looking at the three Japan contenders (maneuverability)
-How the Canadian DND misleads the public about the F-35
-Value of STOVL F-35B over-hyped
-Cuckoo in the nest--U.S. DOD DOT&E F-35 report is out
-6 Feb 2012 Letter from SASC to DOD boss Panetta questioning the decision to lift probation on the F-35B STOVL.
-USAFs F-35 procurement plan is not believable
-December 2011 Australia/Canada Brief
-F-35 Key Performance Perimeters (KPP) and Feb 2012 CRS report
-F-35 DOD Select Acquisition Report (SAR) FY2012
-Release of F-35 2012 test report card shows continued waste on a dud program
-Australian Defence answers serious F-35 project concerns with "so what?"
-Land of the Lost (production cut history update March 2013)
-Outgoing LM F-35 program boss admits to flawed weight assumptions (March 2013)
-A look at the F-35 program's astro-turfing
-F-35 and F-16 cost per flying hour
-Is this aircraft worth over $51B of USMC tac-air funding?
-Combat radius and altitude, A model
-F-35A, noise abatement and airfields and the USAF
-Deceptive marketing practice: F-35 blocks
-The concurrency fraud
-The dung beetle's "it's known" lie
-F-35's air-to-air ability limited
-F-35 Blocks--2006 and today
No comments:
Post a Comment