F-35A Lightning cleared to fly in lightning for first time in 4 years
The Lightning II can once again fly in lightning.
www.defensenews.com
Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning and F-22 'Raptor' : News & Discussion
- Thread starter Nick
- Start date
www.defensenews.com
Pentagon delays F-35 retrofits amid upgrade woes
Older F-35 stealth fighters were slated to start getting the Technology Refresh 3 upgrade this month, but the Pentagon has postponed the retrofit plan to an unspecified date.
WASHINGTON — Problems with an upgrade installed on some Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighters rolling off the production line have now disrupted plans to incorporate those upgrades on existing aircraft, and the F-35 Joint Program Office does not have a date for when those jets will get the much-anticipated retrofits.The F-35 program “was scheduled to begin TR-3 [Technology Refresh 3] retrofits in April 2024 with the intent to modify 149 aircraft over the subsequent 12-month period,” JPO spokesperson Russ Goemaere told Breaking Defense. But now, “[t]he Program is working closely with F-35 customers to establish a new start date for those modifications based on a number of factors including software and supply chains.
“Very capable TR-2 jets will continue to fly operational missions while awaiting the start of TR-3 retrofits,” he said. A breakdown of how those planned retrofits are shared across the fighter’s three variants and international customer base was not immediately available.
“We must improve our efficiency in integrating and testing TR-3 and Block 4 capabilities (Hardware and Software),” Goemaere said.
Since July 2023, the Pentagon has refused to accept newly built F-35s due to software woes with the TR-3 upgrade, which has slipped numerous times past its original fielding date expected for April 2023. TR-3 is now projected to be completed sometime between July and September of this year, when Lockheed will then be able to deliver new, fully upgraded planes, according to the company. (The F-35 program is also exploring a plan to resume deliveries before TR-3 is finished, but no decision has yet been made.)
Lockheed has continued to build and deliver jets equipped with TR-2 in the meantime, and previously planned on shipping out TR-3 kits that could be swapped out with TR-2 on existing fighters starting this month. But the upgrade’s continued software woes, combined with supply chain issues constraining the production of TR-3 hardware, have now pushed back those retrofit plans to an unspecified date.
Though the JPO acknowledged there’s no specified date for the retrofits, Goemaere claimed they are “not delayed indefinitely.
“Retrofits will be deferred for a period time until TR-3 software performance improves and manufacturing rates of TR-3 hardware meets the demands of production, sustainment, and retrofits,” he said. “The F-35 program has been and continues to take steps to increase manufacturing rates with progress over recent months.”
Goemaere did tell Breaking Defense that “[d]elays in production of TR-3 parts for new aircraft builds has caused delays in production of TR-3 parts for current aircraft,” adding “recovery is expected in FY25.” Goemaere also said that “risk still remains with TR-3 delivery and production. However, the JPO and Lockheed Martin anticipate production of TR-3 hardware kits will keep pace with the delivery schedule once DD250 resumes.” DD250 refers to the government’s check out process for accepting new weapon systems.
TR-3 — which features a more powerful processor, greater memory and a panoramic cockpit display that collectively enable a suite of new capabilities known as Block 4 — has been a source of pride for Lockheed but also a headache as problems arose. The company has maintained it can still build at a rate of 156 jets per year, but only 75 to 110 new stealth fighters are expected to be delivered in 2024 as a result of the TR-3 issues.
As many as 100 to 120 jets could be awaiting delivery come the year’s end as Lockheed works to clear out its backlog once acceptances resume, executives said during the company’s January earnings call. The Pentagon has additionally been withholding $7 million in payments for each newly-built F-35 placed in storage, Bloomberg reported, which could amount to a total of over $800 million if the delivery pause stretches through June.
In December, F-35 program head Air Force Lt. Gen. Mike Schmidt warned lawmakers about TR-3 hardware shortages and pointed the finger at some supply chain issues. Challenges with getting “a couple” of unspecified TR-3 components risked impacts to both newly built jets and planned retrofits, Schmidt testified.
“The TR-3 hardware is coming up a ramp that is not where it needs to be. It is not meeting our contractual requirements,” Schmidt said. He later told reporters that industry has “a little time here to ramp up, but they need to do it quickly parts-wise.”
For its part, the Air Force has said that TR-3 issues informed the service’s decision to scale back its latest fighter buy, with the Navy and Marine Corps also cutting their F-35 spending due to budget caps imposed by Congress.
“We want the planes that we want. And the TR-3 [and] Block 4 capabilities have been delayed. So, our approach is to minimize the impact of that by procuring fewer of those in the first years of the FYDP [future years defense program],” Kristyn Jones, who is performing the duties of the service’s under secretary, told reporters in a March 11 briefing. Toward the end of the five-year FYDP spending outlook, the F-35 buy would then climb back up as more capabilities become available, she added. Following the briefing, an Air Force spokesperson confirmed to Breaking Defense that the service’s decision was influenced by “both software and hardware delays.”
The National Guard in its FY25 unfunded priority list requested money to restore the F-35 purchases that the Air Force sought to cut.
Citing the company’s quiet period ahead of an earnings call planned for later this month, Lockheed declined to answer detailed questions about TR-3 production for this report, but said “TR-3 remains our top priority and we continue to produce F-35s at rate.
“We expect to begin delivering TR-3 jets in the third quarter and are committed to providing unrivaled, advanced capabilities in support of our customers’ missions,” the company continued. “As stated in our January earnings call, the aircraft delivery range for 2024 is between 75 and 110 and requires TR-3 suppliers to keep pace with production demands, both this year and in the future. We have deployed employees to suppliers to expedite quality hardware delivery and are working to ensure the required kit production capacity infrastructure, supporting demand for new production aircraft, modification and spares.”
The Lowdown On Lockheed’s Newly Revealed Mako Hypersonic Missile
Mako is an interesting weapon with compelling features, and may offer clues as to the capabilities of a similar weapon the USAF is procuring.
www.twz.com
4000mm x 330mm (13"), 130lb (59kg) warhead. Mach 5+. Range 350+km. Internal carry. F-35 can carry up to 6, F-15EX ~12.
So to F-35 haters... F-35's striking Iran going to be considered "real combat?"
Closer to Kinzhal than a zircon. Nothing impressive. Still better than anything
The Lowdown On Lockheed’s Newly Revealed Mako Hypersonic Missile
Mako is an interesting weapon with compelling features, and may offer clues as to the capabilities of a similar weapon the USAF is procuring.
4000mm x 330mm (13"), 130lb (59kg) warhead. Mach 5+. Range 350+km. Internal carry. F-35 can carry up to 6, F-15EX ~12.
View attachment 32979
Cheap mass produced weapons are better than complicated expensive ones for strike. Even Zircons have been intercepted.
In reality. Images of wreckage as proof already posted. It's basically just a Kinzhal powered by a scramjet instead of a rocket motor when it boils down to it. And like the Kinzhal, it slows down during descent.In your dreams, maybe
A picture of the alleged zircon that was shot down by either a SAMP/T or Patriot battery earlier this year. @BMD @Rajput Lion
Obviously, a biased source but still - Defense Express UA
I guess take it with a grain of salt since there haven't been any official pics of zircon but it does somewhat match up with the grainy launch photos so it might be legit. I believe that the patriot & aster families can likely intercept these missiles at least. The SM series will absolutely have a positive intercept ratio.
Maybe you ought to research and learn that current Israeli F-35's, or 90% of them, are F-35A standard and just call them F-35I's. F-35I's (Israeli version) are not superior in any way to current USAF F-35A's. The only real changes are their coms and EW system and their EW system is not superior to the F-35A's Barracuda EW.
It's strange, but if I had to choose between the two, I'd still choose the Israeli system! But I prefer the French systems anyway.
F-35 Sustainment: Costs Continue to Rise While Planned Use and Availability Have Decreased
And I thought the price per flight hour was set to fall!
Page 2
And I thought the price per flight hour was set to fall!
Costs should be adjusted to 2012 year dollars. To have a real look at whether the price is going down. Inflation will always be a higher price in the current year
Of course, if you use the aircraft for more years, it will cost more. I think they had 2070 as the retirement date before.
"There is extended years to the programme. DOD plans to use the F-35 aircraft through 2088.
One reason for the increase in cost estimates is the extension of the service life of the aircraft."
AS if no one can see what they are doing. Typical GAO, using current year dollars against base year dollars. The f-35A $4.1 is 2012 base year dollars. "The Air Force set an operating cost goal of $4.1 million per airplane per year—in fiscal 2012 dollars"
"DOD currently estimates the Air Force will pay $6.6 million annually to operate and sustain each individual aircraft. . In 2023, the Air Force increased the amount of money it can afford to spend per F-35 aircraft to $6.8 million per year. This continues to be well above the $4.1 million original target."
Of course, if you use the aircraft for more years, it will cost more. I think they had 2070 as the retirement date before.
"There is extended years to the programme. DOD plans to use the F-35 aircraft through 2088.
One reason for the increase in cost estimates is the extension of the service life of the aircraft."
AS if no one can see what they are doing. Typical GAO, using current year dollars against base year dollars. The f-35A $4.1 is 2012 base year dollars. "The Air Force set an operating cost goal of $4.1 million per airplane per year—in fiscal 2012 dollars"
"DOD currently estimates the Air Force will pay $6.6 million annually to operate and sustain each individual aircraft. . In 2023, the Air Force increased the amount of money it can afford to spend per F-35 aircraft to $6.8 million per year. This continues to be well above the $4.1 million original target."
Even using current year prices, The 2020 price of $7.8. The 2023 price has come down to $6.6. Which shows a lot.
"1 Sept 2022 — It cost the U.S. Air Force in 2020 about $7.8 million to fly one of its F-35A fighters. That was nearly double the service's $4.1 million goal (2012)."
www.defensenews.com
"1 Sept 2022 — It cost the U.S. Air Force in 2020 about $7.8 million to fly one of its F-35A fighters. That was nearly double the service's $4.1 million goal (2012)."
Lockheed, Pentagon claim they’re reining in F-35 sustainment costs
It cost the U.S. Air Force in 2020 about $7.8 million to fly one of its F-35A fighters. That was nearly double the service’s $4.1 million goal.
www.defensenews.com
44% increase in 5 years seems to me a lot more than inflation.
No the number of plane doesn't change and the number of flying hours doesn't change too, they just decrease the number of hours by years because F-35 is limited by logistic to generate more flying hours.
No, they have summarised this sentence on a graph which is entirely based on the year 2012 dollars.
You have to read the endnote #7 to understand it's the contrary:Even using current year prices, The 2020 price of $7.8. The 2023 price has come down to $6.6. Which shows a lot.
"1 Sept 2022 — It cost the U.S. Air Force in 2020 about $7.8 million to fly one of its F-35A fighters. That was nearly double the service's $4.1 million goal (2012)."
Lockheed, Pentagon claim they’re reining in F-35 sustainment costs
It cost the U.S. Air Force in 2020 about $7.8 million to fly one of its F-35A fighters. That was nearly double the service’s $4.1 million goal.
RAAF Australia's f-35 activity ambitions in free fall:
12500 hours scheduled between July 2023 and June 2024. The PAES shows that only 10500 will be achieved.
p44
https://www.defence.gov.au/sites/default/files/2024-02/2023-24_Defence_PAES_00_Complete.pdf
Ambitions for the following years were 13500 hours for 25-26 and 27-28 (p68 of this doc https://www.defence.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-05/2023-24_defence_pbs_00_complete.pdf). These are reduced to 12,000 in the PAES 23/24.
Several phenomena need to be taken into account:
- deliveries are stopped for an indefinite period,
- F-35 hours are being reduced to limit the MCO budget,
- MCO capacities are currently limited due to Israeli requirements.
According to this document, there are still 12 F-35s to be delivered: https: //www.defence.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-05/2023-24_defence_pbs_03_appendices.pdf
At the date of publication of the PAES, the RAAF estimated that it could achieve 10500 hours with 60 F-35s, i.e. 14.5 hours and 13.9 hours when all the F-35s have been delivered.
In 2021, the RAAF's ambitions were 14900 hours for 72 F-35s in 2023/24. That's 17.2 hours per F-35 per month.https://www.defence.gov.au/sites/default/files/2022-02/2020-21_Defence_PAES_00_Complete.pdf
So we have a RAAF that has revised its ambitions, by one hour less activity every year thanks to its "maturing understanding of the F-35".
12500 hours scheduled between July 2023 and June 2024. The PAES shows that only 10500 will be achieved.
p44
https://www.defence.gov.au/sites/default/files/2024-02/2023-24_Defence_PAES_00_Complete.pdf
Ambitions for the following years were 13500 hours for 25-26 and 27-28 (p68 of this doc https://www.defence.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-05/2023-24_defence_pbs_00_complete.pdf). These are reduced to 12,000 in the PAES 23/24.
Several phenomena need to be taken into account:
- deliveries are stopped for an indefinite period,
- F-35 hours are being reduced to limit the MCO budget,
- MCO capacities are currently limited due to Israeli requirements.
According to this document, there are still 12 F-35s to be delivered: https: //www.defence.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-05/2023-24_defence_pbs_03_appendices.pdf
At the date of publication of the PAES, the RAAF estimated that it could achieve 10500 hours with 60 F-35s, i.e. 14.5 hours and 13.9 hours when all the F-35s have been delivered.
In 2021, the RAAF's ambitions were 14900 hours for 72 F-35s in 2023/24. That's 17.2 hours per F-35 per month.https://www.defence.gov.au/sites/default/files/2022-02/2020-21_Defence_PAES_00_Complete.pdf
So we have a RAAF that has revised its ambitions, by one hour less activity every year thanks to its "maturing understanding of the F-35".
Last edited:
We can calculate the estimated cost per flight hour!
Let me give you an example:
You want to calculate the 2023 estimate of the price per F-35 A flight hour over the life of the programme. The first graph gives you the annual cost of an F-35 at 6.6 million 2012 dollars (if you want today's dollars, you have to add inflation over 12 years). The second graph shows that the estimate was based on 187 hours of flight per year and the quotient 6600000/187 gives $35294. If you want today's dollars, you have to add 25% or $9000 which gives $44294.
Using the same method, the French Court of Auditors calculated the cost of the Rafale MCO in 2013 and published it in the form of a table in this document:
https://www.ccomptes.fr/fr/documents/28074 page 44.
The value is €14,596
And the same for 2019. François Cornut-Gentille questioned the Minister for the Armed Forces and obtained in response the cost in payment appropriations of the MCO for 2018, which, according to this document:
questions.assemblee-nationale.fr
amounts to 423.1 million for a fleet of 103.5 Rafales on average over the year, i.e. €4.1 million per aircraft, and as French aircraft fly 250 hours a year, that works out at €16,352 per flight hour
So it seems that a flight hour on a Rafale is half the price of a flight hour on an F-35.
Let me give you an example:
You want to calculate the 2023 estimate of the price per F-35 A flight hour over the life of the programme. The first graph gives you the annual cost of an F-35 at 6.6 million 2012 dollars (if you want today's dollars, you have to add inflation over 12 years). The second graph shows that the estimate was based on 187 hours of flight per year and the quotient 6600000/187 gives $35294. If you want today's dollars, you have to add 25% or $9000 which gives $44294.
Using the same method, the French Court of Auditors calculated the cost of the Rafale MCO in 2013 and published it in the form of a table in this document:
https://www.ccomptes.fr/fr/documents/28074 page 44.
The value is €14,596
And the same for 2019. François Cornut-Gentille questioned the Minister for the Armed Forces and obtained in response the cost in payment appropriations of the MCO for 2018, which, according to this document:
Question n°15768 - Assemblée nationale
Presentation de l'Assemblee nationale, du palais Bourbon, de ses membres (deputes), de son fonctionnement et de son actualite : agenda, travaux en cours (amendements, rapports, commissions, lois), textes et dossiers (legislatifs ou d'actualite)...
amounts to 423.1 million for a fleet of 103.5 Rafales on average over the year, i.e. €4.1 million per aircraft, and as French aircraft fly 250 hours a year, that works out at €16,352 per flight hour
So it seems that a flight hour on a Rafale is half the price of a flight hour on an F-35.