|
F-35 Strike Fighter.
Click on the picture to hear the wav sound.
|
General Specifications
|
Projected Cost:
F-35 model A:
F-35 model B:
F-35 model C:
Primary Function:
Crew:
Engine:
Thrust:
LiftFan/Thrust:
Weight Empty:
Max. Weight:
Cannons:
Ordnance A & C:
Ordnance B:
Length:
Wingspan:
Max. Speed:
Climb Rate:
Ceiling:
Range Internal Fuel:
First Flight:
|
$216 million ea.
$262 million ea.
$261 million ea.
multi role attack
one
P&W F135
1 x 43,000 lbs.
1 x 18,000 lbs.
29,800 lbs.
70,500 lbs.
1- 25 mm
4,000 lbs stealth
2,000 lbs stealth
51' 5"
35' 0"
1,062.6 mph tested
25,000 fpm (est.)
43,000 feet tested
936 - 1,612 miles
12/15/2006
|
The F-35 Strike Fighter light attack stealthy aircraft, also known as the Joint Strike Fighter or JSF, is primarily produced by Lockheed-Martin along with Northrop Grumman and BAE Systems.
It was intended to be a low cost replacement for numerous aging aircraft designs. A combined total of 2,443 aircraft were planned for use by the
U.S. Air Force, U.S. Navy, and U.S. Marines in three variants to keep development costs down.
The F-35 Strike Fighter is not intended for air superiority, nor to evade radar as well as the currently deployed stealth fighter aircraft. What the F-35 Strike Fighter lacked in its ability to perform missions was going to be made up for by its low cost. Therefore, even with an anticipated 50% mission available rate, there should have been enough of the aircraft ready to complete assigned sorties.
The F-35 Strike Fighter project has been described as a US$395.7 billion money pit. Anticipated costs to fly the F-35 Strike Fighter, based on experience with the only stealth fighter currently flown by the U.S.A.F., are about US$77,000 per hour. The costs may even be higher, given the complexity of the F-35 Strike Fighter model B with a second engine driving a lift fan plus additional parts to give it short take-off and landing capabilities.
The F-35 Strike Fighter has been called a poorly maneuvering flying gas tank that will be extremely vulnerable to small arms fire from the ground, and unable to defend itself against missiles or modern fighter aircraft.
The concept behind the aircraft is of one that should have been inexpensive to produce. The F-35 Strike Fighter is intended to be use in a world where conflicts like that taking place in Afghanistan are common. Idealy there should be no modern fighter aircraft for it to face, nor should there be be any ground
fire, old technology L-band radar guided ground-to-air defensive systems to fly against, or any threats coming at it from other than head-on. The vulnerability of our stealth design aircraft to detection became readily apparent when one F-117 was downed and a second damaged beyond repair by surface to air missiles, when detected by older radar over Yugoslavia.
Recently Russia has flown a stealth fifth generation stealthy fighter aircraft that will be in competition with the F-35 Strike Fighter. It is being manufactured in India, and will be offered for export around the world. Selling price will be
about one third or less that of the F-35 Strike Fighter. China is also developing such an aircraft.
Unlike thinking by the current U.S. administration, a great number of nations feel that air superiority aircraft are necessary.
India is currently in final negotiations to purchase a total of 126 French Dassault Rafale fighter aircraft, and have never even considering the F-35. Several nations have
expressed an interest in the U.S. produced F-22 Raptor. However production of that aircraft has ended and it has not been offered for export.
A better designation for the F-35 Strike Fighter may be A-35 (A for attack). When comparing it to other aircraft, it is somewhat like a supersonic version
of the recently retired F-117 bomber with regard to its limited stealth capabilities, and lack of accelleration or maneuverability. However, that aircraft carried
5,000 lbs. of ordnance vs. 4,000 lbs. for the F-35 A and C models, or 2,000 lbs. for the F-35 B model, when flown under maximum
stealth conditions. In comparison, the U.S. produced F-15 Eagle carries some 24,000 lbs. of ordnance. However, it does not pretend to have any stealth capabilities.
The F-35 Strike Fighter is being produced in three models: A conventional land based version for the USAF designated the model "A",
a STOVL (short take-off vertical landing) version for the USMC, the Royal Air Force and the Royal Navy designated the model
"B", and a carrier-based version for the U. S. Navy designated the model "C".
F-35B hovering.
In the model "B" STOVL, the weight and size of the lift fan in the aircraft takes up room that would normally be used to carry weapons and fuel.
The model "C" is a version of the basic aircraft with modifications to adapt it to
aircraft carrier operations. It is intended to be the U.S. Navy's first stealth aircraft.
It was originally intended that, as a cost savings measure, the government would purchase the aircraft before it was flown or tested. It was also intended, as a cost saving measure, that 80 percent of aircraft parts would be the same on all three
models. However, the U.S. GAO tells us that all 63 of the first aircraft that were delivered, which the government paid for, were priced at about US$1 billion over budget. Furthermore, none of them will be available for combat without major rebuilding. Thousands of lines of code still need to be written and tested before they can fly combat missions. This could take another two to four years and cost U.S. taxpayers millions of dollars more. Also, the models only have about 25
percent of their parts in common, and are, in fact, three distinct aircraft.
The F-35 Strike Fighter has its share of critics, particularly regarding its lack of acceleration, especially in the transsonic speed range, slower top speed than any fighter aircraft it
is likely to face, lack of super cruise capability, prominent radar signature for a stealth aircraft, lack of maneuverability, due to a
high wing loading, small internal payload, necessary when operating in stealth mode limiting it to only two air to air missiles, and
vulnerability from small arms fire when operating as a ground support aircraft.
The USAF answers by telling us that the F-35 Strike Fighter is not designed for air superiority. They
believe that it is superior as a multi-role aircraft. According to the USAF and Lockheed, the aircraft will achieve multi-role aircraft
superiority once the code is completed so that its sensor suite and advanced radar system are functional. These systems are supposed to enable the F-35 Strike Fighter to monitor air
and ground threats simultaneously while well beyond the range of competing systems. We can only guess how they will perform under actual combat conditions, if and once the codes are finally completed and flight tested.
The USAF tells us that the stealth capabilities of the F-35 Strike Fighter are optimized for head-on attack. In addition to a minimal head-on radar signature, the
aircraft is also optimized for minimal infrared emissions. Overall, the Air Force stated that the aircraft is "its most stealthy yet"
when it comes to the evasion of threats from other aircraft or surface to air missiles provided that they are only coming at the F-35 Strike Fighter from straight ahead.
The USAF points out that when the F-35 Strike Fighter does not have to operate in a stealth mode, the amount of ordnance carried outside the aircraft
will make it "a formidable adversary", provided it will only be engaging in beyond visual range combat against
enemy aircraft armed with old, slow, non-maneuverable missiles.
Disregarding air combat history and the arguments of aviation experts throughout the world, the USAF argues
that maneuverability and maximum air speed are "very small factors" when considering the overall performance of an
aircraft. They told us that the F-35 Strike Fighter exhibits a "high degree of stability" and can "nearly
match the acceleration" of today's most modern fighters at sub sonic speeds, but is not able to react as quickly. At its maximum
speed, we were told that maneuverability of the aircraft "can almost match" that of the Fighting Falcon. Recent
revelations by the Pentagon show the F-35 Strike Fighter slow in acceleration during transonic speed flight tests and experiencing shaking during supersonic maneuvering. It has also been unstable during slow speed maneuvering.
The intent is to use the F-35 Strike Fighter at high altitudes, where it will be out of the range of small arms fire, to provide ground support. It will not
be defending our ground troops by attacking enemy tanks, armor, or fortified positions, like the A-10 that it is supposed to be replacing,
unless it can be safe from surface to air missiles, anti aircraft, and small arms which may be used against it. Rather, from its high
altitude position, it will gather intelligence about battlefield conditions which will be sent, in real time, to ground troops. The
aircraft will conduct these operations in stealth mode in order to attempt to avoid surface to air missiles.
If flying over enemy territory, up to eight F-35 Strike Fighter aircraft would operate in support of each other. Each aircraft would be equipped for
a specific duty, such as intelligence gathering, electronic counter measures, air to air defense, and ground attack. The USAF believes
that the overall capabilities of the eight aircraft working together will make up for the F-35's lack of abilities operating separately.
So long as the F-35 Strike Fighter will outnumber enemy fighters by eight to one, they may have an even chance of surviving any engagements.
Lockheed Martin estimates that production of F-35 Strike Fighter, at their highly automated Fort Worth facility, can reach about 230 aircraft a year.
Aircraft have not been built in the United States in such large quantities as quickly since World War II. The United States
government sees the F-35 Strike Fighter project as a program that is too big to be allowed to fail, due to its employment of many American workers during times of high unemployment.
MILESTONES:
April 2008: F-35 Strike Fighter $15 billion over budged and delayed 24 months.
Oct. 10, 2008: F-35 Strike Fighter noise quadruple that of the F-15.
Sept. 16, 2009: "L" band radar sees through F-35 Strike Fighter stealth.
Oct. 23, 2009: No improvements noticed in F-35 Strike Fighter program.
Oct. 28, 2009: F-35 Strike Fighter dog fighting abilities are "a disaster."
Nov. 2009: Carrier decks will buckle unless F-35B exhaust fixed.
Jan. 7, 2010: First testing of F-35B.
Jan. 11, 2010: U.S. government gives Lockheed US$2.8 billion to cover cost overruns.
Jan. 19, 2010: Revelation that in 2009 F-35's scheduled for 168 test flights; only 16 made.
Feb. 1, 2010: General in charge of F-35 Strike Fighter project fired.
Feb. 1, 2010: Lockheed doesn't get US$614 million bonus.
Feb. 2, 2010: Fifth F-35 Strike Fighter prototype test flown.
Feb. 25, 2010: Third F-35 Strike Fighter model B starts tests.
Feb. 25, 2010: A second source of the F-35 Strike Fighter engine "will not add to project cost" and may lower cost through competition announced.
Feb. 25, 2010: Full F-35 Strike Fighter production start delayed until November of 2015.
March 10, 2010: P&W F-35 Strike Fighter engine $4.8 billion over budget.
March 11, 2010: F-35 Strike Fighter development program $97 billion over cost and 30 months late.
March 17, 2010: F-35B has first successful hover flight.
March 18, 2010: F-35B first ever vertical landing.
April 8, 2010: First successful flight of avionics loaded F-35 Strike Fighter.
April 12, 2010: First F-35 model B naval version
free fall tests imitating shipboard landings.
May 20, 2010: U.S. government gives Lockheed an additional $143 million in hopes of meeting F-35 Strike Fighter program latest revised schedule.
May 20, 2010: Armed Services Committee budgets additional development funds for GE/RR second engine source in 2011.
May 24, 2010: The Netherlands pulls out of F-35 Strike Fighter program development.
May 24, 2010: U.S. D.O.D. discloses F-35 Strike Fighter aircraft only share about 1/4 of their parts and are actually three distinct aircraft.
June 1, 2010: Pentagon estimates F-35 Strike Fighter program $150.4 billion over budget, 48 months late.
June 7, 2010: First F-35 model C flown.
June 15, 2010: First Mach 1+ flight of F-35B during which parts of aircraft fall off and excessive vibration experienced.
Jan. 18, 2011: Pentagon reveals F-35 Strike Fighter unstable during low and transonic speed
flight tests; engine fails full power performance tests; avionics do not meet specifications; parts failing at high rates.
Feb. 4, 2011: The Pentagon announces that the F-35 Strike Fighter program needs $4.6 billion dollars more in 2012 to address engine problems and necessary upgrades.
Feb. 10, 2011: Announcement that Congress "saves" U.S. taxpayers $450 million by terminating the competitive engine program by GE that may have helped keep costs down. The
F-35 Strike Fighter program now depends only on the P & W engine, that thus far has not performed to specifications and is billions over budget that will have no competition.
March 11, 2011: Flight tests stopped due to leaking oil and on board power failures.
March 15, 2011: GAO announces F-35 Strike Fighter computer programs more than three years behind development schedule.
March 18, 2011: Pentagon says that the anticipated price tag to manufacture and support the F-35 Strike Fighter is "still unacceptable". Meanwhile the USAF and USN tell Congress that costs are "credible".
March 22, 2011: USAF admits before Congress that deployment of the F-35 Strike Fighter will
again be delayed, this time at least another two years.
March 24, 2011: Turkey cancels plans to purchase 100 F-35 Strike Fighter aircraft (see Jan. 6, 2012).
Nov. 4, 2011: F-35 achieves its maximum speed of 1,062.6 mph.
Nov. 9, 2011: P&W says their engine in the F-35B has been tested successfully for short take off and landing from the deck of a ship at sea.
Dec. 14, 2011: Pentagon F-35 Strike Fighter report shows:
Pilot's helmet display has night vision and blurring problems.
Fuel dump leaves deposits on aircraft.
Arresting hook on F-35C does not work due to being positioned incorrectly by about 10 feet. That is about 20% of the length of the aircraft away from where it should be.
Premature failure of airframe components.
Premature electrical systems failures including redundant systems, pilot oxygen, and cockpit pressurization.
Severe shaking while maneuvering at supersonic speeds.
Overheating of electrical systems in primary displays.
Inability to fly aircraft under loads to fully test thermal management.
Inability to fly air-to-air or air-to-ground test flights.
Fuel system susceptible to fires.
Aircraft easily damaged by lightning strikes resulting in directive not to fly within 25 miles of thunder storms.
Frequent failure of integrated power pack system.
Range and maneuverability affected much more than anticipated as aircraft payloads increase.
Aircraft software development is now five years behind schedule.
Overall program costs have increased by about US$3 billion to now total about US$385 billion since last estimate.
Lockheed responded to the Pentagon report by stating that they have exceeded 2011 development goals.
Dec. 20, 2011: Japan announces that it intends to acquire 43 F-35 Strike Fighter aircraft while negotiating the purchase of six of the aircraft.
Dec, 22, 2011: Robbin Laird, F-35 Strike Fighter program supporter, wrote that Japan's decision to purchase the F-35 Strike Fighter is an excellent decision.
According to Laird, the F-35 will be equipped with the latest systems. With other aircraft those systems would need to be added. Laird further states that is intended that anti-ballistic
missile systems, such as the Aegis used by the U.S. Navy, will be able to link to systems on the F-35 Strike Fighter for over-the-horizon guidance,
once developed. The sensor systems being developed for the F-35 are "unique" and "world-class" for the delivery of air to air and air to ground ordnance.
If other U.S. allies in the area all purchase the F-35 Strike Fighter, Japan's aircraft will more easily be able to fly joint missions with them.
Jan. 6, 2012: Turkey announces they will conduct talks with Lockheed regarding the purchase of two F-35 Strike Fighter aircraft. On March 21, 2011
Turkey cancelled their plans to purchase 100 of the aircraft. At this time it is unclear if they are considering revising their decision.
Jan. 18, 2012: Lockheed says performance of their F-35 Strike Fighter will probably not meet specifications.
Jan. 19, 2012: Lockheed announces that they will start testing of a new fuel dump system that doesn't deposit fuel on the aircraft in April of 2012.
Jan. 20, 2012: Pentagon says all 63 F-35 Strike Fighter aircraft delivered to date need major air frame and electronics upgrades to become operational.
Feb. 15, 2012: Pentagon delays purchases of 179 F-35 Strike Fighter aircraft through 2016 to decrease number of aircraft delivered needing air frame and electronic upgrades.
Feb. 16, 2012: Italy announces reduction in F-35 purchases from 131 to 90 aircraft.
Feb. 17, 2012: Lockheed says cost of F-35 will be increased an unspecified amount, due to purchase delays and reductions.
March 20, 2012: U.S. GAO announces first 63 F-35 Strike Fighters cost US$1 billion more than anticipated. All of the aircraft will need major rebuilding before being able to fly combat missions. The cost for rebuilding has not been included in the GAO report.
March 29, 2012: The Pentagon announces latest program costs increased another US$16.3 billion and are now at US$395.6 billion.
You can find the RC F-35 here.
Email us.
|
| |
|
|
F-35 Strike Fighter
