Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning and F-22 'Raptor' : News & Discussion

I suppose we will have the answer in a few months then. Either LM successfully delivers TR-3, or they are gonna announce more delays.
Since I'm considered to be a pessimist, I've provided an update on my perception of the state of the F-35 programme:
  • We are still waiting for the milstone C to be passed, allowing series production of the aircraft 10 years after the first scheduled date, which makes it illegal to produce around 900 aircraft.
  • We have learned that the aircraft is overheating because the cooling requirement was incorrectly specified at 14 kW, whereas the aircraft currently needs 32 kW, and that block 4 will need 47 kW, and that beyond that the requirement could rise to 80 kW. As a result, the PTMS is operating beyond its specifications, reducing engine replacement cycles and costing $38 billion over the life of the programme, while causing catastrophic aircraft availability.
  • The aircraft produced by Lockheed are no longer accepted by the USAF because the integration of block 3F with TR3 produces unstable software that prevents acceptance flights from being carried out. With the resolution of this problem being postponed by 6 months every 6 months, Lockheed has reached the point of proposing reduced versions of TR3 which could work with a reduced version of B 3F allowing only the acceptance tests to be carried out in flight.
  • Lastly, the core of the F-35's engine needs to be changed, or the engine changed altogether to be able to operate all the capabilities of block 4 at the same time, because of the weakness of the electrical generation on the current version of the engine. The solution to this problem will not arrive before 2028, yet it is block 4 that has all the capabilities needed to pass milstone C without fraud, and which also has the capabilities relating to weapons that have been sold for export.
For me, the perception of the situation has never been so bad for the F-35 programme.
 
Since I'm considered to be a pessimist, I've provided an update on my perception of the state of the F-35 programme:
  • We are still waiting for the milstone C to be passed, allowing series production of the aircraft 10 years after the first scheduled date, which makes it illegal to produce around 900 aircraft.
  • We have learned that the aircraft is overheating because the cooling requirement was incorrectly specified at 14 kW, whereas the aircraft currently needs 32 kW, and that block 4 will need 47 kW, and that beyond that the requirement could rise to 80 kW. As a result, the PTMS is operating beyond its specifications, reducing engine replacement cycles and costing $38 billion over the life of the programme, while causing catastrophic aircraft availability.
  • The aircraft produced by Lockheed are no longer accepted by the USAF because the integration of block 3F with TR3 produces unstable software that prevents acceptance flights from being carried out. With the resolution of this problem being postponed by 6 months every 6 months, Lockheed has reached the point of proposing reduced versions of TR3 which could work with a reduced version of B 3F allowing only the acceptance tests to be carried out in flight.
  • Lastly, the core of the F-35's engine needs to be changed, or the engine changed altogether to be able to operate all the capabilities of block 4 at the same time, because of the weakness of the electrical generation on the current version of the engine. The solution to this problem will not arrive before 2028, yet it is block 4 that has all the capabilities needed to pass milstone C without fraud, and which also has the capabilities relating to weapons that have been sold for export.
For me, the perception of the situation has never been so bad for the F-35 programme.

Milestone C is for Block 3F though. It was supposed to be done on TR-2, but needed the TR-3 upgrade to get everything working properly. And that's in process.

I have no idea how well they planned their cooling requirements for 3F and 4 initially, but I think it's doable if they do not have to tear apart the airframe for Block 4.

Considering how the F-16 was developed into a different jet with each major block, the F-35 could follow suit with Block 5+. So if that comes with a higher thrust engine or even a new one, that's par for the course. It's also possible the Block 4 will get an upgrade and B5+ will get a new engine.

The F-35's acceptance tests with interim TR-3 is only to put jets in the hands of squadrons. It's gonna take the squadrons a year to operationalize the jets, and TR-3 could become ready long before then.
 
Milestone C is for Block 3F though. It was supposed to be done on TR-2, but needed the TR-3 upgrade to get everything working properly. And that's in process.
No, Milestone C will likely be done on TR2 because operatonal test (IOT&E) end last year in November. But the report was supposed to come out 90 days after the end of the tests, which is about now, and we'll see what anomalies they found, because Lockheed was particularly lenient in its classification of anomalies during development, both in terms of number (over 800) and severity (over 100 category 1 anomalies reclassified as category 2), so there's a big risk that the independent assessment won't be in line with Lockheed's assessment.

I have no idea how well they planned their cooling requirements for 3F and 4 initially, but I think it's doable if they do not have to tear apart the airframe for Block 4.
It's very problematic: cooling to 32 Kw when the specification was 14, causes the motor to operate out of specification, making it heat up more than expected and reducing the life of the reactor core. The additional maintenance this entails has been estimated at $38 billion over the life of the programme, and is the main factor in the F-135's poor availability. If we continue with this expedient, pushing it up to 47 kW instead of the proposed 32 kW, it will exacerbate the engine and availability problems.
 
No, Milestone C will likely be done on TR2 because operatonal test (IOT&E) end last year in November. But the report was supposed to come out 90 days after the end of the tests, which is about now, and we'll see what anomalies they found, because Lockheed was particularly lenient in its classification of anomalies during development, both in terms of number (over 800) and severity (over 100 category 1 anomalies reclassified as category 2), so there's a big risk that the independent assessment won't be in line with Lockheed's assessment.

Okay. But Milestone C is for FRP, ie, Lot 20 onwards. So the decision to go ahead with bulk orders requires both JSE qualification and TR-3 delivery.

But yeah, the result of the JSE will be interesting.

Pre-JSE summary for those interested.

It's very problematic: cooling to 32 Kw when the specification was 14, causes the motor to operate out of specification, making it heat up more than expected and reducing the life of the reactor core. The additional maintenance this entails has been estimated at $38 billion over the life of the programme, and is the main factor in the F-135's poor availability. If we continue with this expedient, pushing it up to 47 kW instead of the proposed 32 kW, it will exacerbate the engine and availability problems.

Sure, but this is a problem for old jets, not the ones delivered in the future post certification.
 
But yeah, the result of the JSE will be interesting.

:ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO:

The program continues to field immature, deficient, and insufficiently tested mission systems software to fielded units without adequate operational testing.

Although the program designed C2D2 around commercial “agile software” development concepts, it does not adhere to the industry best practices that include clear articulation of the capabilities required in the Minimum Viable Product, focused testing, comprehensive characterization of the product, and full delivery of the specified operational capabilities.

The program has consistently failed to deliver the full set of capabilities contained in their master schedule as defined by the Air System Playbook, which was updated again in FY22 to realign capability delivery to another delayed schedule.
 
Having a tool that allows you to torture the software even more by subjecting it to more complex scenarios is not going to improve operational test results in the short term.

For that I hope they have a magic wand.

The idea behind JSE was to test whether the F-35's design is effective against current and future threats, it in no way accelerates the actual R&D effort. It would either maintain pace or they will have to re-evaluate the design.

That's why the main litmus test is when the TR-3 is accepted, not the interim version. And whatever is discovered in the JSE, they will have to bring those fixes in for B5+.
 
The idea behind JSE was to test whether the F-35's design is effective against current and future threats, it in no way accelerates the actual R&D effort. It would either maintain pace or they will have to re-evaluate the design.

That's why the main litmus test is when the TR-3 is accepted, not the interim version. And whatever is discovered in the JSE, they will have to bring those fixes in for B5+.
So milestone C with B5 ?
 
So milestone C with B5 ?

No, just FRP with a less capable jet than anticipated for B3F and 4.

B5+ would have to be a modernization. Rafale's equivalent of the F3R or even F5 as a whole.

What's interesting is pretty much all export models are Block 4 and lower. If B5+ comes with a new engine, then only the US will end up operating it within the framework of NATO. So it's pretty unpredictable to us right now.
 
No, just FRP with a less capable jet than anticipated for B3F and 4.

B5+ would have to be a modernization. Rafale's equivalent of the F3R or even F5 as a whole.

What's interesting is pretty much all export models are Block 4 and lower. If B5+ comes with a new engine, then only the US will end up operating it within the framework of NATO. So it's pretty unpredictable to us right now.
Here's a link to an interesting document that summarises news we already know and which I'm quoting because of the following table:


file.php

This table shows that batches 9 to 14 were scheduled to be delivered with TR2, which was the case, but also with Block 4. This means that since the 173rd aircraft, deliveries should have been made with Block 4. As we have just celebrated the 1000th aircraft produced, this gives you an idea of the time delay.

The question now is how many of these aircraft will need TR3 for block 4 to work. Or will they remain at 3F without the planned upgrades?
 
Here's a link to an interesting document that summarises news we already know and which I'm quoting because of the following table:


file.php

This table shows that batches 9 to 14 were scheduled to be delivered with TR2, which was the case, but also with Block 4. This means that since the 173rd aircraft, deliveries should have been made with Block 4. As we have just celebrated the 1000th aircraft produced, this gives you an idea of the time delay.

The question now is how many of these aircraft will need TR3 for block 4 to work. Or will they remain at 3F without the planned upgrades?

As mentioned earlier, TR-2 was supposed to power Block 3F and Block 4 increments 4.1 (for all jets) and 4.3 (for yet-to-be-upgraded jets).

The 40 series is basically 4.4 which requires TR-3. This is where they may have added all the new stuff too.

But later they figured out TR-2 is insufficient to power even 3F, let alone B4+. So a lot of 3F and 4.1/4.3 capabilities were transferred over to TR-3. Which is why once we see TR-3 accepted, it would signal the implementation of full 3F capabilities.

So the chart doesn't reflect today's reality. Where it says Block 3F TR-2 and Block 4 TR-2, it's been replaced with TR-3.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Picdelamirand-oil
As mentioned earlier, TR-2 was supposed to power Block 3F and Block 4 increments 4.1 (for all jets) and 4.3 (for yet-to-be-upgraded jets).

The 40 series is basically 4.4 which requires TR-3. This is where they may have added all the new stuff too.

But later they figured out TR-2 is insufficient to power even 3F, let alone B4+. So a lot of 3F and 4.1/4.3 capabilities were transferred over to TR-3. Which is why once we see TR-3 accepted, it would signal the implementation of full 3F capabilities.

So the chart doesn't reflect today's reality. Where it says Block 3F TR-2 and Block 4 TR-2, it's been replaced with TR-3.
So now there is a lot of retrofit needed to implement TR3. And the new question is : Does it will need an increase in cooling capacity? And an increase in electrical generation?
 
So now there is a lot of retrofit needed to implement TR3. And the new question is : Does it will need an increase in cooling capacity? And an increase in electrical generation?

We have the answer to that, 14 kW to 47 kW by 2030 for B4 and then 60-80 kW for B5+ with new motor and pipes. As for the engine, I guess they are still in the process of deciding whether it will be an upgrade or full replacement.

My gut feeling says existing jets will get upgrades, 'cause all export jets come with the F135, and it's the cheapest option. And since the main customer for B5+ is the US, they will get a new engine that will ensure commonality with NGAD. The US may even make an Okhotnik class drone powered by NGAD's engine.

The F-16 followed a similar route, with initial lots carrying P&W and GE coming in from Block 30 onwards. The GE engine needed a bigger inlet, so the F-35 B5+ could come with certain modifications that could make the same engine impossible for older F-35s, ensuring business for P&W for as many as 1800-2000 F-35s built before 2032. The remaining 1000+ engines + future exports would then come in with GE's AETP.

It's very likely that the NGAD engine will power the F-35A (1000+ jets). The USN could make a similar decision for the B and C post their NgAD decision (1000+ jets).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Picdelamirand-oil
We have the answer to that, 14 kW to 47 kW by 2030 for B4 and then 60-80 kW for B5+ with new motor and pipes. As for the engine, I guess they are still in the process of deciding whether it will be an upgrade or full replacement.

My gut feeling says existing jets will get upgrades, 'cause all export jets come with the F135, and it's the cheapest option. And since the main customer for B5+ is the US, they will get a new engine that will ensure commonality with NGAD. The US may even make an Okhotnik class drone powered by NGAD's engine.

The F-16 followed a similar route, with initial lots carrying P&W and GE coming in from Block 30 onwards. The GE engine needed a bigger inlet, so the F-35 B5+ could come with certain modifications that could make the same engine impossible for older F-35s, ensuring business for P&W for as many as 1800-2000 F-35s built before 2032. The remaining 1000+ engines + future exports would then come in with GE's AETP.

It's very likely that the NGAD engine will power the F-35A (1000+ jets). The USN could make a similar decision for the B and C post their NgAD decision (1000+ jets).
If that had been known, no one would have rushed to buy F-35s prematurely.
 
If that had been known, no one would have rushed to buy F-35s prematurely.

The F-35 was supposed to be B4-ready before the NGAD even started flying. Nor was the NGAD program planned when the F-35 was chosen in 2001. Cannot blame the Americans for the NGAD's timeframe overlapping with the F-35 B5. Choosing the second engine is just common sense. Also, what I said earlier stands, only the USAF is relevant, so it makes sense they maintain a higher level of capabilities.

Anyway, we are not sure what level of modifications are necessary for B4 to B5+. It's possible that partner jets will only get whatever the cooling system can handle until a post-2040 MLU alongside software upgrades. So, at the very least they will be getting most of what they paid for.

Most of the partner nations were hasty anyway.
 
LM declare three more months before TR3 blk3F ready.

ANd that :

Lockheed said in October that its production rate was affected by low availability of assemblies for processors, solid rocket motors, castings and forgings, and that its F-35 program had been hardest hit.

Net sales for the F-35 program fell by $275 million in the fourth quarter compared with the previous year.

Some analysts are concerned about the risks associated with supply chain disruptions, which they fear will not dissipate quickly.
 
LM declare three more months before TR3 blk3F ready.
The defense company said deliveries may slip into the third quarter after previously guiding that the so-called TR-3 version of the F-35 would start shipping in the second quarter. The Pentagon has said it won’t take the upgraded Joint Strike Fighters until issues are fully resolved with the aircraft’s largest and most sophisticated software upgrade.

I said that the slippage was 6 months every 6 months, which is verified by a slippage of 3 months after 3 months! If they don't change anything, TR3 will never be ready!
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Herciv
More details and also delivery problems with some components :

Upgraded F-35 deliveries slipping to fall 2024, Lockheed says​

By Stephen Losey
Jan 23, 08:49 PM

7Y53UVCG4NEQHM6FPLK5LWHXPU.jpg
If the F-35 upgrades known as Technology Refresh 3 aren't ready for deliveries to resume in the third quarter, Lockheed said it may slow down production. (Staff Sgt. Kaitlyn Ergish/U.S. Air Force)
WASHINGTON — Lockheed Martin’s production of the latest upgraded F-35 Joint Strike Fighters is slipping further behind schedule, and deliveries likely will not resume until the third quarter of 2024, the company said Tuesday.
Lockheed CEO Jim Taiclet told investors in an earnings call that the business now expects to deliver between 75 and 110 F-35s this year — fewer than the roughly 150 annually the company typically aims to deliver.

The delivery disruption of the newest F-35s, intended to features upgrades known as Technology Refresh 3, means Lockheed’s sales of the jet took a $400 million hit last year.
Taiclet said the company is making progress on the jets enabled with the TR-3 upgrades, which would come with software and hardware improvements including better displays, computer memory and processing power. But the system maturation process “is taking somewhat more time than we originally anticipated,” he added.
“The second quarter customer acceptance of delivery software remains our target,” he said. “However, we now believe that the third quarter may be a more likely scenario for a TR-3 software acceptance.”

The TR-3 upgrades are needed to prepare the F-35 for a further wave of upgrades known as Block 4, which would allow the jet to carry more precision weapons, advanced sensing, jamming and cybersecurity capabilities, and more accurate target recognition. Rep. Rob Wittman, R-Va., worries TR-3 delays could in turn delay the rollout of Block 4 upgrades.
“We are taking the time and attention to get this [TR-3] technology insertion right the first time because it will be absolutely worth it,” Taiclet said. TR-3′s features “will provide our customers with the onboard digital infrastructure of data storage, data processing, and pilot-user interface to provide unmatched capabilities for many years to come.”
But TR-3, which was originally due in April 2023, has repeatedly slipped behind schedule due to software problems and challenges integrating it with the jet’s new hardware. In July 2023, Lockheed Martin began rolling the first jets intended for the TR-3 configuration off its production line in Fort Worth, Texas.
Because those jets could not undergo test flights the Defense Department requires before delivery, the military refused to accept them. New aircraft awaiting TR-3 are now stored at Fort Worth, and Lockheed said between 100 and 120 jets could remain there later this year.

The F-35 Joint Program Office said in a statement to Defense News that it and industry partners are focused on delivering capable fighters, but that delays in software maturity are still putting those deliveries at risk.
The JPO said it and Lockheed are working on a plan to allow the government to accept undelivered jets before the full TR-3 capabilities are validated.
“Any aircraft involved and delivered as part of the truncation plan will provide valuable capabilities to the warfighters while TR-3 completes final verification and validation,” the office said.
In November, the office confirmed a production F-35 had flown with an interim version of the TR-3 software installed. Flying jets with such early release versions of the software is “potentially” one way for deliveries to resume before TR-3 is done, the JPO said that month.

Lt. Gen. Michael Schmidt, who leads the F-35 program, told lawmakers in December that production of a few key components needed for TR-3 hardware also ramped up slower than expected, which is contributing to the delay.
When the Pentagon halted deliveries, it and Lockheed Martin still expected TR-3 to be ready between December and April 2024. But in September 2023, Lockheed and the JPO said TR-3 could take even longer. That revised schedule placed delivery at sometime between April 2024 — which would already be a full year late — and June 2024.
That schedule is now sliding further, it appears.
Taiclet said more than 90% of the TR-3 capabilities are now in flight test, and Lockheed is moving the software integration process forward to include more aircraft and mission subsystems.

Lockheed’s chief financial officer, Jay Malave, said the company is confident it can meet the new third quarter goal to begin delivering TR-3 jets. But if the schedule slips further, he explained, Lockheed would have to reconsider its production pace of F-35s and possibly slow it down.
The company is bleeding cash due to the F-35 delivery halt — and the wound does not appear likely to heal soon.
“As we make progress [on the] TR-3 program, as well as getting ourselves into production, it’s difficult to take risk and rely on risk retirements as we’re still facing this program, and the progress we’re making there,” Malave said. “And so we assume that profit adjustments slow down in 2024 on the F-35 program.”
Lockheed Martin delivered 98 F-35s in the previous TR-2 configuration in 2023, including 18 in the fourth quarter, Taiclet said. The company originally planned to deliver between 147 and 153 fighters last year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Picdelamirand-oil