Risks ignored with the JSF--2000

Continuing with the "what we knew, way back when" theme, below I have a PDF from Proceedings of the Naval Institute, August 2000. Chuck Spinney puts on his captain obvious hat and well, the rest is history...

In March 1999, the Congressional Budget Office reported to the Senate Armed Services Committee that JSF costs might be underestimated by as much a 50%; in March 2000, the General Accounting Office told Congress the development program should be lengthened to reduce technical/cost risks: "To allow the JSF to proceed as planned-without maturing critical technologies-would perpetuate conditions that have led to cost growth and schedule delays in many prior DoD weapons system acquisition programs."

The GAO claims DoD restructured the program so that the EMD decision will be made with even less information than originally planned, and the program has migrated toward the traditional practice of developing technologies and products concurrently. It is important to remember that the X-32 and X-35 JSF demonstrators are even more limited as concept demonstrators than was the YF-22, so the risks created by concurrency could be even greater. The winner of the JSF "competition" will be determined by a flyoff demonstrating only low-speed handling, STOVL capability, and producibility with at least 70% parts commonality; the YF-22 supersonic cruise demonstrator demonstrated aerodynamics of high-speed, high-G maneuvering, and high alpha, low-speed maneuvering in mock dogfights.

The Trautman fantasy

This week we learned that the first drop of a weapon shape was performed with the F-35. As time goes on, these first-time events give the appearance that their purpose is to benefit Lockheed Martin, so as not to incur U.S. Government schedule penalties, than they are to help America win wars.

As someone rightly pointed out, according to the United States Marketing Corps and others, 2012 was to be initial operating capability (IOC) for the USMC.

The USMC told us so.

Again. And again.

Let us look back oh-so-long-ago (2010) for how this was being projected by the con-artists in the USMC and DOD.

USMC: Still Holding the Beachhead on JSF IOC (March 2010)

"Our IOC is still 2012 and [full operational capability] 2024. Nothing has changed," says Maj. Carl Redding, Marine Corps spokesman.

Eager Marines to Deploy Early Version of JSF While Navy and Air Force Wait (April 2010)

Lieberman asked Marine Corps aviation chief, Lt. Gen. George Trautman, if he wasn’t taking a risk by fielding a squadron of Block 2B aircraft instead of waiting for the Block 3 version, like the Navy and Air Force. The F-35B is so much more capable than the AV-8 Harrier squadron it will be replacing that “its an easy decision to make” Trautman said. It will give Marine air component commanders their first ever stealthy STOVL aircraft operating off Marine amphibs.

JSF F-35B performs first vertical landing (March 2010)

The Marine Corps anticipates reaching JSF F-35B initial operational capability (IOC) in December 2012. IOC assets will include the first F-35B training squadron of 15 aircraft in VMFAT-501 at Eglin AFB, an operational test and evaluation detachment of 4 aircraft at Edwards AFB, and VMFA-332, the Corps' first operational squadron of 10 aircraft at MCAS Yuma. TheVMFA-332 aircraft will be equipped, manned and trained to execute Marine missions and deploy ashore or afloat.

SASC Hearing Sets Record Straight on JSF (March 2010)

We now know, thanks to Michael Gilmore, DoD’s Director of Operational Test and Evaluation, that there is a new system vulnerability issue that he describes thus:

“The program office is executing a comprehensive, robust, and fully funded Live Fire test plan. However, the program’s recent removal of shutoff fuses for engine fueldraulics lines, coupled with the prior removal of dry bay fire extinguishers, has increased the likelihood of aircraft combat losses from ballistic threat induced fires.

“F-35 live fire testing to date has shown that threat impact into fuel tanks results in sustained fires. In addition, the F-35 will be more vulnerable to typical non-combat fires caused by fuel leaks and other system failures without the fire-suppression systems. At present, only the Integrated Power Plant (IPP) bay has a fire suppression system.

“Though the configuration control process has approved the program office’s request to remove these safety systems as an acceptable system trade to balance weight, cost, and risk, I remain concerned regarding the aircraft’s vulnerability to threat-induced and safety-related fires.” (This quote is excerpted from Gilmore’s prepared statement, which he did not read out during the hearing—Ed.)

2010 also marked the year when the F-35 had another Nunn-McCurdy budget increase alert. The last link above mentions more of the scale of problems at the time than does anything that came out of the offices of the faith-based F-35 program cheerleaders.

Different graphic on the same theme-Picture the debt

I had never seen this version of this graphic theme. Pretty impressive.

"The citizens of USA created the U.S. Government to serve them, this is what the U.S. Government has done while serving The People."

Kind of late to discover you can't borrow beyond your means and off-shore everything that isn't nailed down.

.