Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Tue 03/17/2015 View Mon 03/16/2015 View Sun 03/15/2015 View Sat 03/14/2015 View Fri 03/13/2015 View Thu 03/12/2015 View Wed 03/11/2015
1
2015-03-17 Science & Technology
The F-35 Can't Use (Some Of) Its Bombs, Either
Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
Posted by Hupineger Glomomp52169  2015-03-17 00:00|| || Front Page|| [11130 views ]  Top

#1 It can't fire its gun???

Holy incompetence Batman, which Admiral was the Program Manager of this Charlie Foxtrot.
Posted by Mystic 2015-03-17 00:08||   2015-03-17 00:08|| Front Page Top

#2 Say the "DOH"! loud, + say it noud, HOMER!

Perhaps the F-35 should be called "AARDVARK II" in honor of its original Vietnam-era JTF McNamara-ian controversy???

* FYI TOPIX > [Instapundit] OUR NAVY [+ USDOD] IS GETTING DANGEROUSLY SMALLER. AND NO ONE [cares or] IS PAYING ATTENTION.

More reasons as to how-n-why CHINA got control of GUAM-WESTPAC [WN's Blogs Not-Camel-Rock] + HAWAII???
Posted by JosephMendiola 2015-03-17 00:16||   2015-03-17 00:16|| Front Page Top

#3 Just another reason to throw a few hundred million more at this piece of shit. They should rename it the obama-35
Posted by chris 2015-03-17 00:21||   2015-03-17 00:21|| Front Page Top

#4 By all means, scrap the A-10 so we can use the funds to fix the F-35!
Posted by Raj 2015-03-17 00:30||   2015-03-17 00:30|| Front Page Top

#5 Ah, but you only get to solve one of the problems with that money. That we already know about.
Posted by gorb 2015-03-17 01:37||   2015-03-17 01:37|| Front Page Top

#6 1. SDB II is a Block 4 weapon. It was never supposed to be ready with the F-35 until Block 4, currently 2022. SDB I is a Block 3 weapon. Some other weapons the F-35 will not IOC with are JASSM, JSM, and frickin' lasers.

2. The fit problem affects only the F-35B. Currently it can fit 2 per bay. The other models with a larger bay are not affected. Note the SDB I (designed before the F-35 was frozen) does not have this problem.

3. The SDB II was designed after the F-35 design was frozen. Raytheon knew the outline of the F-35B internal bay but decided for their reasons not to conform to it. SDB II is a higher priority for other fighter/bombers that can less afford to be within IADS exposure.

4. The fix that the F-35B will implement is to reroute some (1?) piping, i.e. trivial. It will wait for Block 4, along with a bunch of other fixes, so the production line is not affected.

So, this article is blaming the wrong party, gets the scope of the problem wrong and neglects to mention the how minor the fix, and that the fix is already in the pipeline. Believe very few reports on defense matters. The typical journalist has no competence in this subject and anti-military bias has been drilled into their skulls since J School. 9/10 the author is regurgitating some anti-military think thank, like POGO.


It can't fire its gun???

There is a heck of a lot more to the JSF cannon than pressing a trigger. The aircraft is still in development. Software to track the target, compute the point of impact, integration with the helmet mounted display, testing and lots of other details have to implemented before IOC. In addition, the new APEX ammunition production has to be ramped up. All this comes together by the Air Force IOC date.


scrap the A-10

The Air Force offered to transfer the A-10 to the Army. They didn't want it.

BTW, the F-35 will go through all other air forces and IADS like shit through a goose. Pilots lust after it and other aircraft want to be it, but they don't measure up.
Posted by Clonter Thruling4064 2015-03-17 02:05||   2015-03-17 02:05|| Front Page Top

#7 scrap the A-10.............The Air Force offered to transfer the A-10 to the Army. They didn't want it.

No, the Army doesn't want Nuclear subs, satellites, or the National Park Service either.
Posted by Besoeker 2015-03-17 03:25||   2015-03-17 03:25|| Front Page Top

#8 And who nominated that Admiral?
Posted by JFM 2015-03-17 06:41||   2015-03-17 06:41|| Front Page Top

#9 Hey, Clonter, try reading for comprehension. The "fighter" will be in active service and not able to use its gun. That tells me it's actually still in development, and being rushed out so some deadline is met.

Posted by Rob Crawford 2015-03-17 07:01||   2015-03-17 07:01|| Front Page Top

#10 "However, the F-35 will not have the software package required to operate the bomb loaded onto the fifth generation fighter until 2022"

This cannot be anything but a lie.
Posted by Bright Pebbles 2015-03-17 07:12||   2015-03-17 07:12|| Front Page Top

#11 Jan 10, 2015:
http://www.styrk.com/posts/f-35-on-schedule-despite-gun-software-issue-pentagon-says

A software problem associated with the gun on the F-35 won't delay the stealth jet's operational timeline or its arrival at Hill Air Force Base, Pentagon officials say.

On Dec. 31, the American news website Daily Beast reported that due to a software production delay, the General Dynamics-built gun on the nearly $400 billion Joint Strike Fighter would not be able to fire during missions until 2019 -- four years after the jet is scheduled to become operational.

The article quoted an unnamed Air Force official associated with the F-35 program who said that the software that controls the jet's four-barrel, 25 mm Gatling-type rotary gun called the GAU-22, would not be available until 2019. The Daily Beast story posited that until the gun issue is resolved, the F-35 would not be able to provide close air support for troops on the ground.

But this week Pentagon F-35 spokesman Joe DellaVedova told the Standard-Examiner that the story was misreported and while recent tests did uncover a small issue in the gun's software system, it would cause no delays and have no impact to the program or its timeline.

Comprehensive flight tests on the gun for the Air Force's F-35A variant are scheduled to begin mid-2015 at Edwards Air Force Base, Calif., and will include ground fire tests, muzzle calibration, flight test integration and in-flight operational tests. DellaVedova said the F-35 program remains in its developmental phase and software and other capabilities are only delivered after they are inspected and cleared through flight testing.
----

The gun was always scheduled for Block 3F software. The Air Force moved up IOC date (late 2016) to Block 3I (Block 3 hardware upgrades with Block 2F software ported to the new hardware). IOC previously was with 3F software (i.e. 2017).

BTW, looks like the gun is firing, has been firing, and will fire in F-35As in flight this year but won't be declared operational until 2017 when 3F software is declared operational.

Here is some work on the external gun pod (F-35B and F-35C) that was going on back in 2010. Seems it fired.
http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2010armament/TuesdayLandmarkADouglasParker.pdf


No, the Army doesn't want Nuclear subs, satellites, or the National Park Service either.

Yet the Army planned to buy a fleet of 145 C-27J fixed wing cargo lifters for $6 billion and yearly operational costs exceeding an equal number of C-130Js.

BTW, how expensive is a shot down A-10 and the captured pilot? We've seen that the Soviet equivalent SU-25 have been dropping like flies over the last 10 years whenever the opposition has manpads. The Ukrainians don't even try to fly them over the pro-Russian "rebels" anymore.

Sure, keep 3 or 4 squadrons of A-10 operation to scare away the Fuzzy Wuzzies, as long as Putin doesn't slip a few SA-18s or 24s into their care packages. But if you want to kill them, a smart bomb from altitude is the better choice since they don't hear the bomb until a few seconds before impact and too late seek cover or run. Hence the A-10C.
Posted by Clonter Thruling4064 2015-03-17 09:43||   2015-03-17 09:43|| Front Page Top

#12 Clonter is pretty much right about the F-35. The gun works, but there are some software patches to test for safety and the usual stuff. The SDB works fine, but the SDB II, which is only now being built and won't be ready for service in any plane for a while, and will not be ready for the F-35B until some modifications. The F-35A and C models are on schedule.

As for the A-10 Clonter is wrong not in his facts, but in worrying over much about the air to ground threat vis-a-vis the A-10. It is a very difficult aircraft to bring down, even with a modern hand held SAM. Further, the A-10 delivers more weapons on target at less cost than anything but a B-1, and we have already learned that using a B-1 for CAS is fraught with risk.
Posted by rammer 2015-03-17 10:05||   2015-03-17 10:05|| Front Page Top

#13 Harrumph harrumph, but battleships!
Posted by Shipman 2015-03-17 10:22||   2015-03-17 10:22|| Front Page Top

#14 Battleships. It's what's for breakfast.
Posted by Cloth-Covered Swordfish Biplane 2015-03-17 11:08||   2015-03-17 11:08|| Front Page Top

#15 Submarines and targets, only types of ships are two!
Posted by AlmostAnonymous5839 2015-03-17 12:02||   2015-03-17 12:02|| Front Page Top

#16 Submarines and targets, only types of ships are two!

Subs gotta surface sometime.
Posted by Pappy 2015-03-17 12:35||   2015-03-17 12:35|| Front Page Top

#17 At the Clont's #11:

Please allow me to correct the record on the C-27J Spartan.

I believe the actual USG client for this airframe was/is the Air National Guard.
Posted by Besoeker 2015-03-17 13:37||   2015-03-17 13:37|| Front Page Top

#18 http://archive.defensenews.com/article/20120227/DEFREG02/302270007/Alenia-Warns-U-S-Over-C-27J-Sales
Once a nearly $6 billion Army program for 145 aircraft, the Air Force took over the effort in 2009 and capped the purchase of C-27Js at 38 planes. But in its recent 2013 budget request, it decided to end the program at 21 aircraft, 17 fewer than expected, and retire the fleet next year.

With the draw down in Iraq and the Air Force take over of the program, the Air Force first reduced numbers then canned the project at 21 aircraft. Newly built aircraft were immediately mothballed. The Coast Guard were given most of the aircraft and SOCOM were slated to take a few but don't think anything came of them arming the aircraft into mini gunships.

As for the A-10, 4 or 5 out of the 6 aircraft shoot downs in Desert Storm were from the crappy SA-7 or very short range SAMs. Worse, 20 others suffered major damage and were out of the war and nearly half suffered battle damage and out of action until repaired. By far the worse record of any aircraft. If the war had gone on for 3 or 6 months, the US Air Force would have run out of in theater A-10 and badly eaten in into stateside inventory. The Air Force saw the writing on the wall.

Now the threat is far more deadly with 2 or 3 color IR SAMs that can distinguish between flares and engine heat and mobile short range SAM/gun systems like the TOR and Pantsir. These are 2-3 times the speed, 10-20 times the weight and 20 times the warhead of manpads. A hit by one of these and the A-10 wont be limping home on one engine. They are also showing up in places like Syria and Iran.
Posted by Clonter Thruling4064 2015-03-17 15:12||   2015-03-17 15:12|| Front Page Top

#19 Clonter: Please be advised. I respect your countermeasures knowledge, but you're moving rapidly from open source info, into the classified realm.
Posted by Besoeker 2015-03-17 15:18||   2015-03-17 15:18|| Front Page Top

#20 Huh?
Posted by Clonter Thruling4064 2015-03-17 15:46||   2015-03-17 15:46|| Front Page Top

#21 The only info I looked up was A-10 attrition rates. You can find it here:

http://2951clss-gulfwar.com/
Pilots often flew up to three missions per day with A-10's accounted for destroying 1/4 of Iraq's entire arsenal. [Read more on statistics....] Often exposed to withering anti-aircraft fire and surface-to-air missile threats the slow, highly maneuverable A-10's incurred extensive combat battle damage during Desert Storm. A total of six A-10s were lost: five in combat action, another destroyed attempting to land at KKMC Forward Operating Location #1 after being badly battle damaged durng combat. Nearly twenty more sustained significant battle damage and many others incurred minor damage.
Posted by Clonter Thruling4064 2015-03-17 15:50||   2015-03-17 15:50|| Front Page Top

#22 No source references or further dialogue required. Just mind the OPSEC implications please [Open source or otherwise]. Some of us here still believe we're at war.
Posted by Besoeker 2015-03-17 16:28||   2015-03-17 16:28|| Front Page Top

#23 Who in the hell thinks that in a high threat environment you're not going to take loses? The only way not to is not to get within range of the threat. What's the purpose of that kind of strategy cause you can not dominate a battlefield without being there? Obviously I'm missing something from the record of the history of actual combat. There is no magic. You can plan, you can push technology, but once you face someone with capabilities closing on yours and willing to take casualties and you're not, you're betting on luck. Luck is not a strategy.
Posted by Procopius2k 2015-03-17 17:42||   2015-03-17 17:42|| Front Page Top

#24 Ted Striker: My orders came through. My squadron ships out tomorrow. We're bombing the storage depots at Daiquiri at 1800 hours. We're coming in from the north, below their radar.
Elaine Dickinson: When will you be back?
Ted Striker: I can't tell you that. It's classified.
Posted by Bunyip 2015-03-17 17:45||   2015-03-17 17:45|| Front Page Top

#25 UNtil the F-35 is fully operational, and has PROVEN IT, we need to keep the A10s around. Simple as that. They are too cost effective in low intensity warfare of the sort we fight doing counterinsurgency and anti-terr stuff.
Posted by OldSpook 2015-03-17 21:15||   2015-03-17 21:15|| Front Page Top

#26 Biplane sock off....

Heck, keep the A-10 around longer than that. Give it a bunch of anti-radiation missiles or Brimstones for SEAD and use it as a Forward Air Controller.
Posted by Thing From Snowy Mountain 2015-03-17 21:55||   2015-03-17 21:55|| Front Page Top

23:36 JosephMendiola
23:26 Jomotle Glavith2740
23:23 JosephMendiola
23:09 JosephMendiola
23:06 JosephMendiola
23:02 JosephMendiola
23:00 Mikey Hunt
22:32 Jomotle Glavith2740
22:31 SteveS
22:30 trailing wife
22:16 SteveS
21:55 Thing From Snowy Mountain
21:38 Fred
21:19 SteveS
21:15 OldSpook
21:10 OldSpook
21:06 OldSpook
20:56 DarthVader
20:49 JosephMendiola
20:45 trailing wife
20:43 trailing wife
20:42 trailing wife
20:30 DarthVader
20:23 trailing wife









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com