The F-35 thread

Arthur said:
My own view is that the people behind these sorts of nonsense clickbaity sensationalist reports don't understand software development, large integrated systems, nor the F-35 continuous-development program.

There are at least three- or four-dozen sophisticated "apps" that make up the F-35 system. Each of these, like with any mission-critical systems design, is implemented with a clearly-defined hierarchy of functionality that ranges from absolutely-no-fail-on-mission to important-but-not-critical, all the way to nice-to-have.

Also, so many of these systems are architected to be used on future yet-to-be-developed platforms. So there's a current F-35 implementation, and planned future developments. Basically, versioning.

With such a sophisticated system and ecosystem, not everything can possibly be implemented and debugged in a few steps. So, very deliberately and consciously, the developers work through the functional hierarchy, addressing the most mission-critical must-have functionality first, and scheduling the less critical stuff for later. It's both an iterative process and one of continuous new development, adding capability and addressing less-critical bugs/flaws according to a defined multi-decade schedule.

Along the way, Pentagonistas and budget mavens are driven to get new budget allocations from Congress, so they'll naturally report that stuff isn't finished and more needs to be done. That's largely a political game.

Once you understand this, you'll see why the F-35 and successor software will never really be "finished" or "bug-free". But with each step/release/block, the capability increases. By design.
Click to expand...
That article confuses me as it comes on the back of the twee it posted noting a significant drop in tier 1 problems with the aircraft. If you want to see problems go and look at the tanker program.
 
Interesting article from the X-32 test pilot giving his opinion on the X-32 and why the X-35 won. The main reason the X-32 lost was that the proposal aircraft was vastly different to the X-32 while Lockheed's proposal aircraft closely matched the X35. Another factor was that the X-35 could also got supersonic in VTOL configuration while the X-32 could not.
Yates said there was “great consternation” about the fact that Boeing’s initial design was not the same as what was eventually submitted as their proposal for a production design. By contrast, Yates said, “the Lockheed design was pretty close to what they submitted” for their production proposal. With Boeing’s demonstrator versus its production design “you went from sort of a delta-wing airplane to a more conventional wing version,” Caroll added.
Click to expand...

In those tests, the Lockheed Martin X-35 was able to demonstrate STOVL and supersonic flight in the same configuration, while the Boeing X-32 required maintenance crews to make modifications to the aircraft before it could operate in STOVL mode.
Click to expand...

Source
 
Blu82 said:
Interesting article from the X-32 test pilot giving his opinion on the X-32 and why the X-35 won. The main reason the X-32 lost was that the proposal aircraft was vastly different to the X-32 while Lockheed's proposal aircraft closely matched the X35. Another factor was that the X-35 could also got supersonic in VTOL configuration while the X-32 could not.




Source
Click to expand...

I think it also lost because of this

Boeing-X-32B-1.jpg


How many people would actually volunteer to fly it?
 
So pilot error or aircraft problem it is then. Just a note that there has already been a crash partially caused by misaligned symbology and control services deflection due to many control inputs.
 
Interesting that these "leaked" snaps and videos keep on appearing. Raises Qs about the policy on cellphones onboard Western warships, and how strictly they're enforced. There must be some sort of official toleration ...

Perhaps, commanders reckon - rightly, in my view - that there's no real operational, tactical or strategic disadvantage to having this sort of info "leak" out from "unofficial" sources and channels.
 
Arthur said:
Interesting that these "leaked" snaps and videos keep on appearing. Raises Qs about the policy on cellphones onboard Western warships, and how strictly they're enforced. There must be some sort of official toleration ...

Perhaps, commanders reckon - rightly, in my view - that there's no real operational, tactical or strategic disadvantage to having this sort of info "leak" out from "unofficial" sources and channels.
Click to expand...
In the Israeli Navy the policy was that you were allowed all of your electronics when you were outside and in general areas on board, but they had boxes to put your electronics in outside secure areas.
 
Despite strong anti-US factions in government and the Bundestag resisting the manifest superiority and cost-effectiveness of the F-35, it seems the Luftwaffe might well end up ordering some F-35As. Pentagon certification for Luftwaffe planes carrying US nukes is helping the decision ;).

Will they eventually reinstate the fired Luftwaffe chief?

www.aerotime.aero

Germany to begin F-35A order negotiations with US

Germany is set to discuss a potential order for 30 F-35A fighter jets with the United States.
www.aerotime.aero www.aerotime.aero
 
Last edited:
US Air Force also now saying the program was a "failure" for them.

www.forbes.com

The U.S. Air Force Just Admitted The F-35 Stealth Fighter Has Failed

The U.S. Air Force’s chief of staff wants the service to develop an affordable, lightweight fighter to replace hundreds of aging F-16s and complement a small fleet of sophisticated F-35 stealth fighters. But an affordable, lightweight fighter is exactly what the F-35 was first conceived to be.
www.forbes.com www.forbes.com
 
Dave said:
Checking the video it looks like it was, you can see what looks like landing gear just before impact.
Click to expand...
So did they ever release the cause? Pilot error or issue with the plane? The way those flaps were moving it looked like the plane wasn't in control, and was coming in hot.
 
OhYeah84 said:
So did they ever release the cause? Pilot error or issue with the plane? The way those flaps were moving it looked like the plane wasn't in control, and was coming in hot.
Click to expand...

I haven't heard anything, I suppose until the enquiry completes nothing is going to leaked.
 
Norrad said:
US Air Force also now saying the program was a "failure" for them.

www.forbes.com

The U.S. Air Force Just Admitted The F-35 Stealth Fighter Has Failed

The U.S. Air Force’s chief of staff wants the service to develop an affordable, lightweight fighter to replace hundreds of aging F-16s and complement a small fleet of sophisticated F-35 stealth fighters. But an affordable, lightweight fighter is exactly what the F-35 was first conceived to be.
www.forbes.com www.forbes.com
Click to expand...

Though he's not saying the F35 was a failure, exactly the opposite as it's ended up a high end plane.

The F-35 is a Ferrari, Brown told reporters last Wednesday. “You don’t drive your Ferrari to work every day, you only drive it on Sundays. This is our ‘high end’ [fighter], we want to make sure we don’t use it all for the low-end fight.”
Click to expand...

They were supposed to be developing for a cheap and cheerful (almost cannon fodder on day one) fighter plane, maybe they should just buy Gripens to fill that slot...



PS

This is old news, the article is from Feb 2021.
 
Dave said:
Though he's not saying the F35 was a failure, exactly the opposite as it's ended up a high end plane.



They were supposed to be developing for a cheap and cheerful (almost cannon fodder on day one) fighter plane, maybe they should just buy Gripens to fill that slot...



PS

This is old news, the article is from Feb 2021.
Click to expand...

Gripens and A-29 Super Tucanos.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X