F-22 / F-35 5th Generation jets | News & Discussions.

[hassamun]

F35 grounded over pilot oxygen supply.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40255544

Updated Information:-
http://www.defensenews.com/articles...f-35-oxygen-deprivation-issues-air-force-says

 

[DavidSling]

Elbit, Harris to replace panoramic display in F-35 cockpit

• 
  

• 28 JUNE, 2017
  
• SOURCE: FLIGHTGLOBAL.COM
  
• BY: STEPHEN TRIMBLE
  
• WASHINGTON DC

Elbit Systems and Harris will replace the head-down panoramic display system for the Lockheed Martin F-35 after 2019, the companies have announced.

Lockheed selected Elbit’s US-based subsidiary to begin developing a new large-format, touchscreen display for the F-35 cockpit. Separately, Lockheed awarded a contract to Florida-based Harris to develop a new computer processor for the display.

The selections were made as part of Lockheed’s Technology Refresh 3 (TR3) effort for the F-35, which is installing new electronics in the 16-year-old fighter fighter programme.

As part of TR3, Lockheed also selected Harris to supply a new aircraft memory system for the F-35, updating the solid-state device used to store the aircraft’s operational flight programme software, mission data files and prognostics and health data.

“The new TR3 electronics pave the way for system upgrades well into the future,” says Ed Zoiss, president of Harris Electronic Systems.

A technology development phase for TR3 begins in June 2017, followed by a system qualification phase 1.5 years later, Harris says. Following qualification, Lockheed would award a production contract.

The new suppliers will replace the 20in-wide panoramic display and processor for the F-35 now provided by L-3 Communications.

Since 2010, Elbit Systems of America has proposed the CockpitNG panoramic display as an alternative to the L-3 technology for the F-35, as well as for other fighter programmes, including the cancelled Boeing F-15 Silent Eagle.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/a...o-replace-panoramic-display-in-f-35-c-438871/

 

[mil-avia]

The 2016 DOT&E Report on the F-35 – David Archibald

 

[C130]

The 2016 DOT&E Report on the F-35 – David Archibald

well this is interesting

1.

2.says F-35A is $130 million, but right now they are around $100 million, and in 2018/19 they will be $85 million
https://www.f35.com/news/detail/agreement-reached-on-lowest-priced-f-35s-in-program-history

3.http://aviationweek.com/awin/f-35-weapons-tests-2014-focus-amraam

Although with the bay doors open, the F-35 generates vibration levels exceeding those against which the Amraam has been tested, “right now I don't have any indication this is an aircraft problem,” Wagner says. “Because the bay doors are open for only a very limited amount of time, . . . that short duration is significant, but it is not something that I am too worried about.”

4.

5.http://www.airforce-technology.com/...al-targeting-system-for-f-35-aircraft-4668773

6.

internal carriage of 8x SDBI/II or 8x Spear 3

90% of the time it'll carry external payload

7.

8/9/10/11/12. reliability will get better as the aircraft matures

 

[MMM-E]

100 F35A for TURAF

 

[Gomig-21]

90% of the time it'll carry external payload

90% of the time? What makes you say that? Kind of defeats the whole purpose of the aircraft.

 

[Gomig-21]

Found some more pics from a couple of years ago. Not the greatest resolution, can't remember I think I used my phone so they didn't come out great. I have more recent ones that I took with my Canon 70D and are much better. Just have to dig and find them.

 

[gambit]

90% of the time? What makes you say that? Kind of defeats the whole purpose of the aircraft.

No, it does not. There are always time when being 'stealthy' is not needed.

 

[Gomig-21]

No, it does not. There are always time when being 'stealthy' is not needed.

Not 90% of the time. And in those times they'd most likely use lunberg reflectors, not weapons. Maybe even additional fuel tanks if traveling long distances but even that I don't think would be so frequent with that aircraft's fuel load and in-flight refueling.

Once fully operational, carrying weapons would be on missions and the need for this thing to be stealthy will be considerable. 90% of the time means it only needs to be stealthy 10% of the time? Highly doubtful.

 

[gambit]

Not 90% of the time. And in those times they'd most likely use lunberg reflectors, not weapons. Maybe even additional fuel tanks if traveling long distances but even that I don't think would be so frequent with that aircraft's fuel load and in-flight refueling.

Once fully operational, carrying weapons would be on missions and the need for this thing to be stealthy will be considerable. 90% of the time means it only needs to be stealthy 10% of the time? Highly doubtful.

The need to be 'stealthy' or not depends on target area intelligence. If the radar threat risk is deemed low enough, external stores will be used to increase range and/or weapons load. Do not know what radar enhancers has to do with this.

 

[Gomig-21]

The need to be 'stealthy' or not depends on target area intelligence. If the radar threat risk is deemed low enough, external stores will be used to increase range and/or weapons load.

And that would be 90% of the time? That's the whole point I'm making. Too high of a percentage. As a matter of fact, most target areas will be super hot with radars and SAMs and enemy interceptors and they wouldn't risk increasing their RCS. Even Iraq and Syria as depleted as those two were/are, they never took them as low radar threat risks. And to say 90% of the time they wouldn't need to be stealthy because they need to carry external payloads is nuts. Maybe 10% of the time.

Do not know what radar enhancers has to do with this.

It goes back to the percentage of time they wouldn't need to be stealthy: during peace-time operations when traveling long distances or performing routine patrols off carriers etc., and they need to show up on friendly radars, they'll use lunenbergs and carry a few missiles in their bays. Why would they carry external weapons just to enhance their RCS in situations like that, which make up a HUGE part of that 90% of the time? I understand what you're saying, but doesn't validate 90% or the time.

Even if his point was 90% of just in-country/unfriendly/wartime missions they'd be carrying external payloads is even worst. That maybe be less than 3% IMO.

This thing needs to stay as far away from the action as possible. Wasn't that the whole idea of the super sophisticated standoff software that will make this thing unbeatable? Why would they ever increase or jeopardize its RCS, and during 90% of wartime missions?

 

[gambit]

And that would be 90% of the time? That's the whole point I'm making. Too high of a percentage.

I do not know where you got that %90 of the time figure from. I never said such a thing.

 

[Gomig-21]

I do not know where you got that %90 of the time figure from. I never said such a thing.

No wonder we're going around in circles, lol. You quoted my post #606. If you look at that post again, you'll see I was quoting @C130 's post where HE said that 90% of the time the F-35 will carry external payload. That's where I questioned that 90% claim he made and said it would defeat the purpose of the aircraft and all the stealth tech that has gone into it...to which you responded to that part and here we are.

Good thing we didn't exert a lot of energy on this one!

 

[hassamun]

Clearing the air: F-35s to get upgrade for oxygen generating system over hypoxia concerns

In response to reports of hypoxia-like symptoms experienced by F-35A pilots at Luke Air Force Base, Arizona, the program office intends to make changes to the onboard oxygen generation system to optimize the flow of oxygen to those flying the jet.

The modification to the onboard oxygen generation system, or OBOGS, involves refining the algorithm associated with oxygen concentration, an F-35 joint program office spokesperson explained in a statement to Defense News.

“There is no indication the delivered oxygen concentration was a contributor to any of the recent events,” said Brandi Schiff. However, by tweaking the levels of oxygen associated with varying altitudes, the office may be able to help prevent further physiological incidents from happening.

Honeywell, the manufacturer of the F-35’s OBOGS system, will be responsible for designing upgraded firmware as well as a path to retrofit all variants of the joint strike fighter with the new capability, she said.

“Cost estimates are still being developed,” Schiff said. “The current time estimate is 24 months, but the F-35 joint program office, or JPO, is pushing [F-35 prime contractor] Lockheed Martin to accelerate the fielding of this new firmware.”

On June 9, officials at Luke AFB announced that it would pause F-35 flight operations at the base because of five incidents when pilots experienced symptoms similar to hypoxia, or oxygen deprivation. Experts from the program office were dispatched to the base, where they conducted testing and analysis for a week without reaching a solid conclusion on what had caused the episodes.

Brook Leonard, commander of the 56th Fighter Wing at Luke AFB, ultimately made the decision to restart F-35 flight operations on June 21 after implementing several protective measures such as flying the aircraft at lower altitudes and increasing the minimum levels for backup oxygen systems.

Although the issues with the F-35 have been limited to the A models at Luke AFB, finding the root cause of physiological incidents like hypoxia has proved to be a difficult problem for all of the military services across a wide array of aircraft. The U.S. Navy has had little luck discerning the cause of similar symptoms exhibited by T-45 trainers and F/A-18 Hornets. Further complicating the issue is that the symptoms of oxygen deprivation are very similar to other conditions, like having too much oxygen in the blood or oxygen contamination, making it hard to parse whether the blame can be attributed to just one problem.

There has been only one physiological incident at Luke AFB since flights resumed, said Maj. Rebecca Heyse, a spokeswoman for the base. On July 10, a pilot experienced “hypoxia-like” symptoms during a flight, but inspectors were quickly able to find the culprit: an irregular oxygen valve that has since been replaced. The U.S. Air Force views this as an isolated event that is unconnected to the still-unexplained earlier episodes.

Investigation into the physiological events is ongoing, with the JPO, F-35 physiological event team, the U.S. Air Force’s 711 Human Performance Wing and the Navy Medical Research Unit Dayton all engaged in analysis, Schiff said.

The U.S. Air Force and JPO couldn’t rule out a larger, systemic problem with OBOGS in their initial investigations and plan to do further evaluation. For instance, they will take the F-35s involved in the physiological incidents and conduct “extensive testing” to ensure that all OBOGS components were working properly. They also plan to assess whether life support systems like OBOGS are meeting reliability requirements and conduct air quality tests on Luke AFB jets to ensure oxygen is not being contaminated.

Additionally, Schiff noted that the JPO is evaluating “potential improvements and opportunities for implementing additional sensing capability, including redundant oxygen sensors and a suite of air quality sensors.”

A team of officials from the JPO, U.S. Air Force F-35 integration office and 711 Human Performance Wing is set to arrive at Luke AFB on Wednesday to begin an eight-week “heat exhaust study,” Heyse said.

The team will study how the aircraft ramp is set up and assess temperature and air quality data to ensure pilots are not suffering negative effects on the ground before takeoff that could be exacerbated during flight, she said.

http://www.defensenews.com/articles...-system-hopefully-preventing-hypoxia-symptoms

 

[hassamun]

F-35B helmet's night-vision camera failed during test flight

When an F-35B test pilot landed on the America during a moonless night in November, he was unable to see the deck, so he had to guess where he was above the ship, F-35B, Marine Lt. Col. Tom Fields, F-35 government flight test director, said in the video.

After he had successfully landed, the pilot said something along the lines of, “Control, you’re going to have to give me a compelling reason to do that again,” Fields recalled.

Prime contractor Lockheed Martin issued a statement on Friday saying the company is aware of the issue and working to test potential solutions.

“This is why we have a flight test program – to characterize performance as well as identify anomalies so that we can work solutions and ensure the performance of the aircraft meets warfighter requirements,” the company said in the statement.

https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/articles/f-35b-helmets-night-vision-camera-has-a-problem