Saturday, December 20, 2014

F-35 Program--JPO states maintenance assumptions wrong--fasteners falling into aircraft, 2 year fix


(Change just a few labels on the above artwork and you got it for the F-35 program)

The F-35 program has shown more trouble reports The Wall Street Journal.

Producing well over 100 F-35s now with more on the way, and what is the lasted FUBAR?

The US DOD program manager has stated that maintenance methods were not as well thought out as they should have been. This is interesting considering the huge weight in marketing hype on this very matter since (and before) Lockheed Martin was awarded the Joint Strike Fighter contract back in 2001.

More, they have not, again, after building well over 100 aircraft with more on the way, figured out something as bread-and-butter as fasteners used to connect panels to the aircraft.

One problem is that the F-35’s designers paid more attention to how fast and stealthy the plane would be, and less on how complicated and expensive it could turn out to be for maintainers. “Their influence in the design process is always far less than the guys who are worried about the performance of the aircraft,” Lt. Gen. Chris Bogdan, the military head of the F-35 program, said of those charged with planning the jet’s maintenance.

While the F-35’s reliability has improved, he said it isn’t at the stage where it should be.

For example, the fasteners that held on its high-tech, radar-evading panels kept breaking. “They were falling into the airplane, and we had to go find them,” said Gen. Bogdan. The parts have been redesigned, but it will take at least two years to replace all of them.

"Paid attention to how fast and stealthy the plane would be"... yet failed at that too.


---

-Time's Battleland - 5 Part series on F-35 procurement - 2013 
-Summary of Air Power Australia F-35 points
-Bill Sweetman, Aviation Week and the F-35
-U.S. Government Accounting Office (GAO) F-35 reports
-F-35 JSF: Cold War Anachronism Without a Mission
-History of F-35 Production Cuts
-Looking at the three Japan contenders (maneuverability)
-How the Canadian DND misleads the public about the F-35
-Value of STOVL F-35B over-hyped
-Cuckoo in the nest--U.S. DOD DOT&E F-35 report is out
-6 Feb 2012 Letter from SASC to DOD boss Panetta questioning the decision to lift probation on the F-35B STOVL.
-USAFs F-35 procurement plan is not believable
-December 2011 Australia/Canada Brief
-F-35 Key Performance Perimeters (KPP) and Feb 2012 CRS report
-F-35 DOD Select Acquisition Report (SAR) FY2012
-Release of F-35 2012 test report card shows continued waste on a dud program
-Australian Defence answers serious F-35 project concerns with "so what?"
-Land of the Lost (production cut history update March 2013)
-Outgoing LM F-35 program boss admits to flawed weight assumptions (March 2013)
-A look at the F-35 program's astro-turfing
-F-35 and F-16 cost per flying hour
-Is this aircraft worth over $51B of USMC tac-air funding?
-Combat radius and altitude, A model
-F-35A, noise abatement and airfields and the USAF
-Deceptive marketing practice: F-35 blocks
-The concurrency fraud
-The dung beetle's "it's known" lie
-F-35's air-to-air ability limited
-F-35 Blocks--2006 and today
-The F-35B design is leaking fuel
-F-35 deliveries
-ADF's wacky F-35 assumptions
-Gauging performance, the 2008 F-35, Davis dream brief
-Aboriginal brought out as a prop
-Super Kendall's F-35 problem
-LM sales force in pre-Internet era
-History of F-35 engine problems
-Compare
-JSF hopes and dreams...early days of the Ponzi Scheme
-The Prognostics
-2002--Australia joins the F-35 program
-Congressional Research Service--Through to FY2013, F-35 has received $83.3B in funding
-F-35 choice gives Dutch a shocking high cost per flight hour
-More indications that the F-35 is a failed program

More indications the F-35 program is a failure

LockMart and F-35 fan-base, in fear that more people will discover the obvious fact that the current F-35 roadmap is a disaster, are now offering...more blue-sky-marketing.

“No doubt that the F-35 will be doing air dominance missions in the future,” one industry official said. “Especially with more internal air-to-air, and maybe a new engine.”

Fortunately it is an unnamed source because it is a moron statement.

One would have to create a completely new design because the current F-35 aero dynamics (too wide, wrong wing-sweep for air domination) and being too heavy are just some of the reasons.

You would need a completely new requirement for a completely different design drawn up.

Another added that it was physically impossible for the F-35 to match, much less replace, the F-22. “F-35s will never be able to sit at the table with F-22s in the realm of air-to-air and SEAD/DEAD [suppression of enemy air defenses/destruction of enemy air defenses],” the senior Air Force pilot said. “Doesn't have the performance, doesn't have the payload, doesn't have the stealth.”

And there you go. Note that SEAD/DEAD and other things, are mentioned as a KPP for F-35 Block 3 software.

Failure.

Confirmed.

Again.




Also over on SNAFU.

---

-Time's Battleland - 5 Part series on F-35 procurement - 2013 
-Summary of Air Power Australia F-35 points
-Bill Sweetman, Aviation Week and the F-35
-U.S. Government Accounting Office (GAO) F-35 reports
-F-35 JSF: Cold War Anachronism Without a Mission
-History of F-35 Production Cuts
-Looking at the three Japan contenders (maneuverability)
-How the Canadian DND misleads the public about the F-35
-Value of STOVL F-35B over-hyped
-Cuckoo in the nest--U.S. DOD DOT&E F-35 report is out
-6 Feb 2012 Letter from SASC to DOD boss Panetta questioning the decision to lift probation on the F-35B STOVL.
-USAFs F-35 procurement plan is not believable
-December 2011 Australia/Canada Brief
-F-35 Key Performance Perimeters (KPP) and Feb 2012 CRS report
-F-35 DOD Select Acquisition Report (SAR) FY2012
-Release of F-35 2012 test report card shows continued waste on a dud program
-Australian Defence answers serious F-35 project concerns with "so what?"
-Land of the Lost (production cut history update March 2013)
-Outgoing LM F-35 program boss admits to flawed weight assumptions (March 2013)
-A look at the F-35 program's astro-turfing
-F-35 and F-16 cost per flying hour
-Is this aircraft worth over $51B of USMC tac-air funding?
-Combat radius and altitude, A model
-F-35A, noise abatement and airfields and the USAF
-Deceptive marketing practice: F-35 blocks
-The concurrency fraud
-The dung beetle's "it's known" lie
-F-35's air-to-air ability limited
-F-35 Blocks--2006 and today
-The F-35B design is leaking fuel
-F-35 deliveries
-ADF's wacky F-35 assumptions
-Gauging performance, the 2008 F-35, Davis dream brief
-Aboriginal brought out as a prop
-Super Kendall's F-35 problem
-LM sales force in pre-Internet era
-History of F-35 engine problems
-Compare
-JSF hopes and dreams...early days of the Ponzi Scheme
-The Prognostics
-2002--Australia joins the F-35 program
-Congressional Research Service--Through to FY2013, F-35 has received $83.3B in funding
-F-35 choice gives Dutch a shocking high cost per flight hour

Friday, December 19, 2014

Manoora, QLD crime scene, 8 confirmed dead

I can only describe this as the worst week for Australia since, the 2009 bush fires?

Condolences to the surviving family members.

.

F-35 Pac-Rim depot maintenance

Update via Inside Defense (subscription)

Bogdan: Australia, Japan Selected To Host Pacific Region Sustainment

The F-35 joint program office announced Dec. 17 that Australia and Japan will host the aircraft's first airframe depot maintenance facility and Australia will host the first engine maintenance facility, which will be established no later than 2018.

So, that is interesting.

Thursday, December 18, 2014

Australia will do work on South Korean F-35s.

Australia will do depot maintenance on South Korean F-35s. 

Dec 18 (Reuters) - Australia will carry out both airframe and engine maintenance for South Korea's fleet of Lockheed Martin Corp F-35 fighter jets, as well as its own fleet, an Australian defence source told Reuters on Thursday.

Well, we know Japan was no going to do MX on South Korean F-35s did we not?

Be interesting to see how all of the various South Korean industry responds to this. Like how they do their own F-16s...don't see how this is workable.

.

Depot

About every 7 years or so, a USAF F-15 goes back to Robins AFB, Georgia to get refurbished. It was designed this way, as opposed to an F-16 or F-18 which were originally designed to fly x-amount of hours and then thrown in the trash.

Q: The on-time delivery rate for aircraft has fluctuated widely in recent years? Where is it now?

A: It is improving. You may not recognize it if you pay attention to just due date performance. For example, the (F-15 area) would look like every F-15 we produce is late. That is because we had 26 more than we were supposed to have, so they are queued up and they are accumulating what we call "queue time" or "wait time" before they get into the production machine. As they go through the production machine -- although we are given 145 days -- with actual touch time on an aircraft, we have done jets in 108 days. It still looks like because of all the queue time that it took 210 days, as an example, to do that jet. Put it another way, F-15s right now, with what management has done to work on the processes and the production machine, have gained a 60 percent increase in their speed. And C-130s have about a 35 percent increase in their (speed).

Unfortunate. Less than 10 years ago, it was about 88 flow-days to process an F-15.


Touch labor! One of the places I would visit often,
the F-15 wing shop where after they are removed from
the aircraft, they get a full refurbishment.
(USAF photo)

The C-17?

Q: What are C-130 and C-17 production rates?

A: The C-17 averages about 45 percent, which is an improvement. But what you have to understand about C-17 is even that number is not telling. C-17 is a nose-to-tail activity and when a jet arrives you have a particular work package you are to do on it, but as it is coming in, our partner Boeing and the warfighter have additional things they would like you to do to that aircraft. So there's a certain amount of work that you know you are going to do, programmed planned to do, and then there's added work that comes in with that jet.

Like the F-16 and F-18, the C-17 was pitch to DOD as: "Look, it won't need depot refurbs!".

Sold.

Guess what happened years later as the C-17 flew into the real world? It is now a "depot jet" by any other name; like the F-16 or F-18.

Unlike the F-15, those aircraft were never designed with depot rework built in to address aircraft ageing and wear.

An after-thought.




.

Solo-shot

This goes on record as one of the few YouTube adverts I have not hit the 'cancel' button on.



.

Production

B-47

First flight: 17 December 1947.
Introduction to service: 1951
1000-made milestone: 17 December 1954.
Total made: 2032

USMC F-35 forward operating base plan... unrealistic



As one commenter put it, this is a dead end for USMC planning. The USMC will do anything; say anything, to market the F-35. There are no other priorities for the USMC.

"Wake up Marines. Move on. Before the art of war leaves you behind."

Well this too.

Russian / Chinese Weapon     NATO Designation                 Western WeaponNotes
KAB-500L                                                 -GBU-16 Paveway II
KAB-500Kr-GBU-8 HOBOSDSMAC seeker
KAB-500S/S-E-GBU-32/35 JDAM
KAB-1500L-GBU-10 Paveway II3,000 lb Weapon
KAB-1500Kr-GBU-8 HOBOS3,000 lb Weapon;
DSMAC seeker
KAB-1500S/S-E-GBU-31 JDAM3,000 lb Weapon
KAB-1500TK-GBU-15 CWW; Spice 3,000 lb Weapon
Kh-22 BuryaAS-4 KitchenAvro Blue SteelSupersonic
Kh-29LAS-14B KedgeAS.30 Laser;
AGM-65E Maverick
Supersonic
Kh-29T/TEAS-14A KedgeAGM-65B Maverick;Supersonic
Kh-31A/P/MA/MPAS-17 KryptonNoneMA-31 target drone; Supersonic
Kh-35U UranAS-20 KayakAGM-84 Harpoon
3M-24 UranSS-N-20 SwitchbladeAGM-84 Harpoon
Kh-41/3M-80/3M-82 MoskitSS-N-22 SunburnNoneSupersonic
Kh-55 GranatAS-15A KentBGM-109C TLAM
Kh-55SM GranatAS-15B KentAGM-86C CALCM
Kh-59M/MK OvodAS-18 KazooAGM-142 PopeyeTurbojet powered
Kh-61/3M-55/PJ-10 Yakhont/BrahmosSS-N-26 NoneSupersonic
3M-54E1SS-N-27 SizzlerBGM-109B TASM
3M-54ESS-N-27 SizzlerNoneSupersonic
3M-14ESS-N-27 SizzlerBGM-109C TLAM
HY-1/C-101CSS-N-1 SilkwormNone
HY-2/C-201CSS-N-2 SeersuckerNone
HY-4/C-401CSS-C-7 SadsackNone
YJ-6/C-601CAS-1A KrakenNone
YJ-61/C-611CAS-1B KrakenNone
KD-63-NoneTV/Datalink
YJ-62/C-602-AGM-109/BGM-109BLACM variant expected
YJ-8/C-801CSS-N-4 SardineMM.39/AM.39 Exocet
YJ-82/C-802CSS-N-8 SaccadeAGM-84 Harpoon
KD-82/C-802KD-AGM-84E SLAM
YJ-83/C-803-AGM-84 Harpoon
YJ-7/C-701-AJ-168 Martel
DH-10-BGM-109A/C

How about ballistic missiles?


(click image to make larger - partial APA chart)

CHICOM JDAMs etc.



Artillery?



Rockets?


Mortars?



The F-35 fan-base doesn't understand that targeting of bases for the more sophisticated weapons will be within minutes. Not hours. Not days. A few years ago we lost a handful of Harriers based in hostile territory. Against non-state actors without a first line Army, Navy or Air Force.

---

-Value of STOVL F-35B over-hyped
-Is this aircraft worth over $51B of USMC tac-air funding?
-The F-35B design is leaking fuel

---

-Time's Battleland - 5 Part series on F-35 procurement - 2013 
-Summary of Air Power Australia F-35 points
-Bill Sweetman, Aviation Week and the F-35
-U.S. Government Accounting Office (GAO) F-35 reports
-F-35 JSF: Cold War Anachronism Without a Mission
-History of F-35 Production Cuts
-Looking at the three Japan contenders (maneuverability)
-How the Canadian DND misleads the public about the F-35
-Value of STOVL F-35B over-hyped
-Cuckoo in the nest--U.S. DOD DOT&E F-35 report is out
-6 Feb 2012 Letter from SASC to DOD boss Panetta questioning the decision to lift probation on the F-35B STOVL.
-USAFs F-35 procurement plan is not believable
-December 2011 Australia/Canada Brief
-F-35 Key Performance Perimeters (KPP) and Feb 2012 CRS report
-F-35 DOD Select Acquisition Report (SAR) FY2012
-Release of F-35 2012 test report card shows continued waste on a dud program
-Australian Defence answers serious F-35 project concerns with "so what?"
-Land of the Lost (production cut history update March 2013)
-Outgoing LM F-35 program boss admits to flawed weight assumptions (March 2013)
-A look at the F-35 program's astro-turfing
-F-35 and F-16 cost per flying hour
-Is this aircraft worth over $51B of USMC tac-air funding?
-Combat radius and altitude, A model
-F-35A, noise abatement and airfields and the USAF
-Deceptive marketing practice: F-35 blocks
-The concurrency fraud
-The dung beetle's "it's known" lie
-F-35's air-to-air ability limited
-F-35 Blocks--2006 and today
-The F-35B design is leaking fuel
-F-35 deliveries
-ADF's wacky F-35 assumptions
-Gauging performance, the 2008 F-35, Davis dream brief
-Aboriginal brought out as a prop
-Super Kendall's F-35 problem
-LM sales force in pre-Internet era
-History of F-35 engine problems
-Compare
-JSF hopes and dreams...early days of the Ponzi Scheme
-The Prognostics
-2002--Australia joins the F-35 program
-Congressional Research Service--Through to FY2013, F-35 has received $83.3B in funding
-F-35 choice gives Dutch a shocking high cost per flight hour

Wednesday, December 17, 2014

ANAO DMO major projects report has been released

The Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) has issued a report today on major projects for the Defence Material Organisation.

See the PDF at this link.

We will first look at the F-35 for Australia as it has some interesting information starting on page 177. Note that the ANAO is completely ignorant on combat capability and looks at all of this from a money-spent for widgets delivered approach.

The following will be some very crude numbers I have pulled from the report.

The first batch of 14 aircraft are put down for $2.751M. (Originally announced as $3.2B)This includes the airframe, engines and various initial costs.

The second batch of 58 shows in the report as $10.512M same contents as above.

Total batch cost per aircraft are as follows:

14 F-35s at $196M each and 58 F-35s at $181M each.

Of interest are the basic cost per airframe and motor for the first 2 F-35s that were rolled out recently.

It shows 2 F-35s and 3 engines (1 spare).

F-35 $134.35M each; engine $16.7M each. F-35 with airframe and engine: $151M

All this is of some interest since there are still so many risks with the program. That and the aircraft is likely to get shot down vs emerging (and some existing) Pacific Rim threats. That by itself should raise a red flag of why are we buying this?

You can add some various millions above mentioned in the ANAO report for the MOU contract itself and various other handling fees.

Page 185 has a risk chart. It is a joke considering all of the program risks. It should read high and to the right.

The ANAO report misses a lot. For an organisation that is so concerned over the green eye-shade aspect, they have overlooked on how Australia will pay to run this aircraft. ANAO admits that logistics is a big unknown but Australia will press ahead anyway? Would you want to know how much and aircraft costs to fly each year before buying it? Example, the Dutch figure each F-35 to cost $9.3M (USD) per year to sustain.

For Australia, 72 x $9.3 is $670M per year. So from the RAAF scheduled 2023 for full operating capability to 2043 that could be $13.3B (USD).

Comparative cost per flight hour:

Current legacy F-18 Hornet: $12,000.
Super Hornet: $23,000
F-35: $46,000~$58,000 (USD)

Other costs like engineering changes (the mistake-jet syndrome) are also a wild card. All in all, sustainment of the F-35 is high risk. It is locked in to one U.S. vendor and there won't be any competition. If a widget for the aircraft costs x3 one year and is raised to x5 the next year, Australia has no choice but to eat the cost. The true definition of the fox telling the farmer, the definition of a chicken.

The F-35 fan-club and other dilettantes will see the ANAO report as business-as-usual, manageable and something to move on with.

Hard to fathom when every F-35 we send out against a first-team threat is unlikely to return to base.


---


“It’s about $37 million for the CTOL aircraft, which is the air force variant.”
- Colonel Dwyer Dennis, U.S. JSF Program Office brief to Australian journalists, 2002-

". . . US$40 million dollars . . "
-Senate Estimates/Media Air Commodore John Harvey, AM Angus Houston, Mr Mick Roche, USDM, 2003-

" . . US$45 million in 2002 dollars . ."
-JSCFADT/Senate Estimates, Air Commodore John Harvey, Mr Mick Roche, USDM, 2003/2004-

". . average unit recurring flyaway cost of the JSF will be around US$48 million, in 2002 dollars . . "
-Senate Estimates/Press Club Briefing, Air Commodore John Harvey, 2006

". . the JSF Price (for Australia) - US$55 million average for our aircraft . . in 2006 dollars . ."
-Senate Estimates/Media AVM John Harvey ACM Angus Houston, Nov. 2006-

“…DMO is budgeting around A$131 million in 2005 dollars as the unit procurement cost for the JSF. .”
-AVM John Harvey Briefing, Office of the Minister for Defence, May 2007-

“There are 108 different cost figures for the JSF that I am working with and each of them is correct”
-Dr Steve Gumley, CEO of the DMO, Sep./Oct. 2007-

“…I would be surprised if the JSF cost us anymore than A$75 million … in 2008 dollars at an exchange rate of 0.92”
-JSCFADT Dr Steve Gumley, CEO DMO, July 2008-

". . Dr Gumley's evidence on the cost of the JSF was for the average unit recurring flyaway cost for the Australian buy of 100 aircraft . ."
-JSCFADT/Media AVM John Harvey, Aug. 2008-

Confirmed previous advice i.e. A$75 million in 2008 dollars at an exchange rate of 0.92,
-JSCFADT Dr Steve Gumley, CEO of the DMO, Sep. 2009-

" ...about $77 million per copy."
-Robert Gates, U.S. Secretary of Defense, Feb. 2008.


---

-Time's Battleland - 5 Part series on F-35 procurement - 2013 
-Summary of Air Power Australia F-35 points
-Bill Sweetman, Aviation Week and the F-35
-U.S. Government Accounting Office (GAO) F-35 reports
-F-35 JSF: Cold War Anachronism Without a Mission
-History of F-35 Production Cuts
-Looking at the three Japan contenders (maneuverability)
-How the Canadian DND misleads the public about the F-35
-Value of STOVL F-35B over-hyped
-Cuckoo in the nest--U.S. DOD DOT&E F-35 report is out
-6 Feb 2012 Letter from SASC to DOD boss Panetta questioning the decision to lift probation on the F-35B STOVL.
-USAFs F-35 procurement plan is not believable
-December 2011 Australia/Canada Brief
-F-35 Key Performance Perimeters (KPP) and Feb 2012 CRS report
-F-35 DOD Select Acquisition Report (SAR) FY2012
-Release of F-35 2012 test report card shows continued waste on a dud program
-Australian Defence answers serious F-35 project concerns with "so what?"
-Land of the Lost (production cut history update March 2013)
-Outgoing LM F-35 program boss admits to flawed weight assumptions (March 2013)
-A look at the F-35 program's astro-turfing
-F-35 and F-16 cost per flying hour
-Is this aircraft worth over $51B of USMC tac-air funding?
-Combat radius and altitude, A model
-F-35A, noise abatement and airfields and the USAF
-Deceptive marketing practice: F-35 blocks
-The concurrency fraud
-The dung beetle's "it's known" lie
-F-35's air-to-air ability limited
-F-35 Blocks--2006 and today
-The F-35B design is leaking fuel
-F-35 deliveries
-ADF's wacky F-35 assumptions
-Gauging performance, the 2008 F-35, Davis dream brief
-Aboriginal brought out as a prop
-Super Kendall's F-35 problem
-LM sales force in pre-Internet era
-History of F-35 engine problems
-Compare
-JSF hopes and dreams...early days of the Ponzi Scheme
-The Prognostics
-2002--Australia joins the F-35 program
-Congressional Research Service--Through to FY2013, F-35 has received $83.3B in funding
-F-35 choice gives Dutch a shocking high cost per flight hour