By: OPIT
- 4th February 2016 at 09:01Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Completed clean wing flutter testing reaching speeds of 1.6 Mach and 700 knots with weapon bay doors open and closed (...)
Fine, but I think you're reading too much things between the lines. What were the findings of these tests ?
New
Posts: 3,156
By: hopsalot
- 4th February 2016 at 12:00Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Thanks, but Ill take nearly any source over AV. Bill sweetman has a very well documented agenda. What does validate opening the bays at max speed mean again? GO look up Validate.
It is likely the case that high speed releases haven't been tested yet. The F-35 is still operating under a variety of speed and altitude restrictions and max speed weapons drops aren't where you start your testing...
By: Dazza
- 4th February 2016 at 12:22Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
During the usual, childish squabbling and nob waving that has become the norm on any F-35 thread in this forum (in fact, most threads in this military forum these days...), some of you may have missed the fact that the F-35 is currently taking part in it's first transatlantic crossing, courtesy of the first Italian built F-35A, M.M.7332...
By: Ezco
- 4th February 2016 at 13:11Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
During the usual, childish squabbling and nob waving that has become the norm on any F-35 thread in this forum (in fact, most threads in this military forum these days...), some of you may have missed the fact that the F-35 is currently taking part in it's first transatlantic crossing, courtesy of the first Italian built F-35A, M.M.7332...
Not sure at what altitude the airspeed of 550 knots equals mach 1.2... but im fairly sure that at 25'000 feet it is ~298m/s or ~ 580kts for mach 1.
Have to read the part above.... F-35A with 2B software, was discussed in page 1. In other words, whatever the reason for the restriction there are no F-35A with 2B software that are going to be combat coded. Spudman states they have not tested above Mach 1.2. I think it probably related to bay thermal issues. It's really not an issue if fixed in 3i configuration (for IOC). Probably still not a huge issue till 3f with full war fighting capability.
As others have stated, the test aircraft have flown to 700 knots with bays open and closed.
New
Posts: 8,850
By: MSphere
- 4th February 2016 at 14:02Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Given that this is with a brand new aircraft with a tiny fleet size, and that costs dropped by a huge chunk last year, it suggests good things to come. Maybe not F-16 level operating costs, but something well below F-15 costs. (Not to mention some of the crazy numbers the critics have thrown out.)
It's a double compared to an F-16. That is target missed by only 100%.
New
Posts: 6,983
By: obligatory
- 4th February 2016 at 14:22Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
It's a double compared to an F-16. That is target missed by only 100%.
if you take into consideration that F-15C is more than 40% more expensive to operate than F-15E,
presumably due to age difference, then F-35 is more than double the target, due to F-16 age nowadays
The author of the above opinion piece, whose “think-tank” is financially supported by Lockheed Martin and other US defense contractors, feigns to have forgotten that Congress created the position of Director of OT&E precisely because industry was delivering sub-standard equipment that did not meet contractual goals and was operationally ineffective...
By: djcross
- 4th February 2016 at 15:13Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
O&TE is a jobs program for .gov bureaucrats. OT&E is an unnecessary additional activity in the timeline. ACC and OPNAV will still have to perform tests using real tactics despite what OT&E does.
In decades past, the testing performed during FSD/EMD was to assure a basic level of safety and operability. Combat-style testing was performed by Tactical Air Command, Etc., not by a one-off test organization whose purpose in life is to perpetuate their jobs.
New
Posts: 572
By: Jessmo23
- 4th February 2016 at 15:18Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Not sure at what altitude the airspeed of 550 knots equals mach 1.2... but im fairly sure that at 25'000 feet it is ~298m/s or ~ 580kts for mach 1.
But there NO restrictions over 25k! For the bay. Also since when does altitude equal absolute air speed!? Like everything else with this plane, a work around is in order, until the problem can be solved. The pDF mentioned conditions in the bay that stress the life of the stores. It never mentions some catastrophic buffeting.
By: Robbiesmurf
- 4th February 2016 at 15:36Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
During the usual, childish squabbling and nob waving that has become the norm on any F-35 thread in this forum (in fact, most threads in this military forum these days...), some of you may have missed the fact that the F-35 is currently taking part in it's first transatlantic crossing, courtesy of the first Italian built F-35A, M.M.7332...
By: Spitfire9
- 4th February 2016 at 15:51Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
O&TE is a jobs program for .gov bureaucrats. OT&E is an unnecessary additional activity in the timeline. ACC and OPNAV will still have to perform tests using real tactics despite what OT&E does.
In decades past, the testing performed during FSD/EMD was to assure a basic level of safety and operability. Combat-style testing was performed by Tactical Air Command, Etc., not by a one-off test organization whose purpose in life is to perpetuate their jobs.
I don't have an axe to grind over O&TE. It may be a level of bureaucracy too far but if F-35 is failing tests it is determined it should pass, it is failing tests it should pass. I doubt very much that if the situation were different and the F-35 had passed the tests it failed the Lexington Institute would be belittling the value of tests. In any event the Lexington Institute's opinions/assessments/analyses have little or no value since the institute is reportedly funded inter alia by LM. Conflict of interest between voicing genuine opinion and voicing opinion that advances the cause of its paymasters.
By: FBW
- 4th February 2016 at 16:14Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
During the usual, childish squabbling and nob waving that has become the norm on any F-35 thread in this forum (in fact, most threads in this military forum these days...),
-Dazza
I have to say Dazza, the debates ( sometimes heated) are what makes this forum. Without discourse, it would be just a "military aviation news" link compilation. And the disagreements are key as well, otherwise: people who had an entirely favorable view of x or y program would stick to the likes of f-16.net, russiadefense, the various Indian defense fora, etc. The discourse makes this a vibrant forum and all should appreciate dissenting opinions (while not accepting them at face value).
I, for one, think it is a perfect mix. My only quibble is when people post without fact checking. I'm sure there are many who many not even post, who have learn more from the disagreements on threads like this, than from the like of Jane's, etc.
By: Dazza
- 4th February 2016 at 16:32Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
FBW, I agree, 'discourse' is an essential ingredient in any forum but, my comment stands, too often the same group of individuals carry on with the same pointless, childish, back and forth arguing and petty point scoring, and it ruins the thread having to wade through all the nonsense in the vain hope of trying to find some genuinely useful information. I tend to stick to pprune these days, petty arguing goes on there too, but on nowhere near the scale that one finds here...
By: Tu22m
- 4th February 2016 at 16:37Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
But there NO restrictions over 25k! For the bay. Also since when does altitude equal absolute air speed!? Like everything else with this plane, a work around is in order, until the problem can be solved. The pDF mentioned conditions in the bay that stress the life of the stores. It never mentions some catastrophic buffeting.
Are you not reading or intentionally misunderstanding the document?
Above 25,000 feet, there are no restrictions associated
with the weapons bay doors being closed, regardless
of temperature.
...weapons bay doors being closed...
Yes, the aircraft is allowed to have the bay doors closed above 25'000 feet but the F35A can't open them at above mach 1.2. Tough shlt. But AFAIK nobody has questioned that part.
By: SpudmanWP
- 4th February 2016 at 16:40Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I don't have an axe to grind over O&TE. It may be a level of bureaucracy too far but if F-35 is failing tests it is determined it should pass, it is failing tests it should pass. I doubt very much that if the situation were different and the F-35 had passed the tests it failed the Lexington Institute would be belittling the value of tests.
DOT&E is not running tests, it is only analyzing & reporting on the progress of the SDD program. In other words, he is not reporting anything that the JPO did not already out into their own reports & test results. He's never telling teh program anything that they don't already know.
This is what aggravates the crap out of a lot of guys & gals in various programs. They already know the issues, have a plan, and in some cases already have a solution long before the DOT&E comes out with a report screaming about a problem that might already be fixed.
By: Vnomad
- 4th February 2016 at 16:45Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Are you not reading or intentionally misunderstanding the document?
...weapons bay doors being closed...
Why would you have a heat build up problem with the bay doors open?! The ambient temp. is well below freezing.
Yes, the aircraft is allowed to have the bay doors closed above 25'000 feet but the F35A can't open them at above mach 1.2. Tough shlt. But AFAIK nobody has questioned that part.
What happens if you decided to open them anyway?
EDWARDS AIR FORCE BASE, Calif., Feb 11, 2013 – An F-35A Lightning II conventional takeoff and landing aircraft, known as AF-1, completed its final test mission for clean wing flutter recently. Flutter testing was conducted to ensure the jet’s structure could withstand various aerodynamic loads verifying the F-35A’s design. The mission, flown by Maj. Ryan “Gunner” Reinhardt, marks the conclusion of three years of testing that now allows the F-35A to proceed with tests continuing to expand its flight envelope and validate predictions in real-world scenarios. The testing demonstrated the F-35 is clear of flutter, at speeds up to 1.6 Mach and 700 knots with weapon bay doors open or closed, critical to performing its combat mission. Data collected proves the F-35A flight dynamics maintains a large margin between its designed airspeed and airspeeds where possible flutter could occur.
Posts: 5,197
By: SpudmanWP - 4th February 2016 at 08:02 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
There is only so much money every year and they want to kickstart LRSB.
Besides, base on the extra F-35As that Congress added last year and the likelihood that it happens again, they are ahead of the game.
We'll know more when the budget numbers come out in a few days.
Posts: 893
By: OPIT - 4th February 2016 at 09:01 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Fine, but I think you're reading too much things between the lines. What were the findings of these tests ?
Posts: 3,156
By: hopsalot - 4th February 2016 at 12:00 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
It is likely the case that high speed releases haven't been tested yet. The F-35 is still operating under a variety of speed and altitude restrictions and max speed weapons drops aren't where you start your testing...
Posts: 1,407
By: Dazza - 4th February 2016 at 12:22 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
During the usual, childish squabbling and nob waving that has become the norm on any F-35 thread in this forum (in fact, most threads in this military forum these days...), some of you may have missed the fact that the F-35 is currently taking part in it's first transatlantic crossing, courtesy of the first Italian built F-35A, M.M.7332...
http://cannontwo.blogspot.pt/2016/02/f-35-lightning-ii-aterrou-nas-lajes.html
And a little more info...
http://airheadsfly.com/2016/01/27/f-35-to-start-first-atlantic-crossing-on-2-february/
-Dazza
Posts: 174
By: Ezco - 4th February 2016 at 13:11 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
from your article:
"Update | The flight was delayed on 2 February due to weather. " :eek:
Posts: 3,106
By: FBW - 4th February 2016 at 13:35 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Have to read the part above.... F-35A with 2B software, was discussed in page 1. In other words, whatever the reason for the restriction there are no F-35A with 2B software that are going to be combat coded. Spudman states they have not tested above Mach 1.2. I think it probably related to bay thermal issues. It's really not an issue if fixed in 3i configuration (for IOC). Probably still not a huge issue till 3f with full war fighting capability.
As others have stated, the test aircraft have flown to 700 knots with bays open and closed.
Posts: 8,850
By: MSphere - 4th February 2016 at 14:02 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
It's a double compared to an F-16. That is target missed by only 100%.Posts: 6,983
By: obligatory - 4th February 2016 at 14:22 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
if you take into consideration that F-15C is more than 40% more expensive to operate than F-15E,
presumably due to age difference, then F-35 is more than double the target, due to F-16 age nowadays
Posts: 2,626
By: Spitfire9 - 4th February 2016 at 14:23 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Lexington Institute belittles F-35 test failures
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articles-view/release/3/170934/lockheed-lobbyist-shoots-messenger-over-f_35-failings.html
Note added by defense-aerospace editor:
Posts: 5,396
By: djcross - 4th February 2016 at 15:13 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
O&TE is a jobs program for .gov bureaucrats. OT&E is an unnecessary additional activity in the timeline. ACC and OPNAV will still have to perform tests using real tactics despite what OT&E does.
In decades past, the testing performed during FSD/EMD was to assure a basic level of safety and operability. Combat-style testing was performed by Tactical Air Command, Etc., not by a one-off test organization whose purpose in life is to perpetuate their jobs.
Posts: 572
By: Jessmo23 - 4th February 2016 at 15:18 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
But there NO restrictions over 25k! For the bay. Also since when does altitude equal absolute air speed!? Like everything else with this plane, a work around is in order, until the problem can be solved. The pDF mentioned conditions in the bay that stress the life of the stores. It never mentions some catastrophic buffeting.
Posts: 584
By: Robbiesmurf - 4th February 2016 at 15:36 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Now, I would have put it in a slightly more subtle way but thanks for the info.
Posts: 5,197
By: SpudmanWP - 4th February 2016 at 15:39 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Hence Gilmore's new title of SLICCiC :eagerness:
Posts: 1,407
By: Dazza - 4th February 2016 at 15:42 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I thought I was being subtle! :)
-Dazza
Posts: 2,626
By: Spitfire9 - 4th February 2016 at 15:51 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I don't have an axe to grind over O&TE. It may be a level of bureaucracy too far but if F-35 is failing tests it is determined it should pass, it is failing tests it should pass. I doubt very much that if the situation were different and the F-35 had passed the tests it failed the Lexington Institute would be belittling the value of tests. In any event the Lexington Institute's opinions/assessments/analyses have little or no value since the institute is reportedly funded inter alia by LM. Conflict of interest between voicing genuine opinion and voicing opinion that advances the cause of its paymasters.
Posts: 3,106
By: FBW - 4th February 2016 at 16:14 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I have to say Dazza, the debates ( sometimes heated) are what makes this forum. Without discourse, it would be just a "military aviation news" link compilation. And the disagreements are key as well, otherwise: people who had an entirely favorable view of x or y program would stick to the likes of f-16.net, russiadefense, the various Indian defense fora, etc. The discourse makes this a vibrant forum and all should appreciate dissenting opinions (while not accepting them at face value).
I, for one, think it is a perfect mix. My only quibble is when people post without fact checking. I'm sure there are many who many not even post, who have learn more from the disagreements on threads like this, than from the like of Jane's, etc.
Posts: 1,407
By: Dazza - 4th February 2016 at 16:32 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
FBW, I agree, 'discourse' is an essential ingredient in any forum but, my comment stands, too often the same group of individuals carry on with the same pointless, childish, back and forth arguing and petty point scoring, and it ruins the thread having to wade through all the nonsense in the vain hope of trying to find some genuinely useful information. I tend to stick to pprune these days, petty arguing goes on there too, but on nowhere near the scale that one finds here...
-Dazza
Posts: 1,149
By: Tu22m - 4th February 2016 at 16:37 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Are you not reading or intentionally misunderstanding the document?
...weapons bay doors being closed...
Yes, the aircraft is allowed to have the bay doors closed above 25'000 feet but the F35A can't open them at above mach 1.2. Tough shlt. But AFAIK nobody has questioned that part.
Posts: 5,197
By: SpudmanWP - 4th February 2016 at 16:40 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
DOT&E is not running tests, it is only analyzing & reporting on the progress of the SDD program. In other words, he is not reporting anything that the JPO did not already out into their own reports & test results. He's never telling teh program anything that they don't already know.
This is what aggravates the crap out of a lot of guys & gals in various programs. They already know the issues, have a plan, and in some cases already have a solution long before the DOT&E comes out with a report screaming about a problem that might already be fixed.
Posts: 2,661
By: Vnomad - 4th February 2016 at 16:45 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Why would you have a heat build up problem with the bay doors open?! The ambient temp. is well below freezing.
What happens if you decided to open them anyway?
EDWARDS AIR FORCE BASE, Calif., Feb 11, 2013 – An F-35A Lightning II conventional takeoff and landing aircraft, known as AF-1, completed its final test mission for clean wing flutter recently. Flutter testing was conducted to ensure the jet’s structure could withstand various aerodynamic loads verifying the F-35A’s design. The mission, flown by Maj. Ryan “Gunner” Reinhardt, marks the conclusion of three years of testing that now allows the F-35A to proceed with tests continuing to expand its flight envelope and validate predictions in real-world scenarios. The testing demonstrated the F-35 is clear of flutter, at speeds up to 1.6 Mach and 700 knots with weapon bay doors open or closed, critical to performing its combat mission. Data collected proves the F-35A flight dynamics maintains a large margin between its designed airspeed and airspeeds where possible flutter could occur.
http://www.lockheedmartin.com/uk/news/press-releases/2013-press-releases/f-35a-completes-3-year-clean-wing-flutter-testing-programme.html