F-35 ett fiasko? Läckta Rand rapporten och annat kul

Ble selvsagt skrevet provoserende som svar på mange som kommer med sprøyt om F-35 her inne.
Men konklusjonen til slutt står seg.

Tveklöst så är F-35 en mycket kapabel kärra, även om jag är övertygad att man skulle ha fått ett bättre flygplan snabbare, om man skulle ha satsat på ge åtminstone STOVL-versionen ett helt eget skrov, istället för att komplicera, kompromissa och försämra landversionen och hangarfartygsversionen, med ett för kort och knubbigt skrov, för korta och tvära luftintag, med motorn placerad onödigt långt fram och med strukturella handikapp, p.g.a. att man har byggt alla flygplans struktur, runt en lyftfläkt som inte finns där, i de flesta flygplanen.

Detta verkar också vara lärdomar som USAF och US Navy har tagit till sig, då de för nästa generation flygplan (som primärt ska ersätta F-15C respektive återta den kapacitet som man förlorade med F-14) ska ha två egna skrov, där man använder gemensam avionik och gemensamma motorer. Vidare så har man även lärt sig läxan att börja med motorerna i god tid, eftersom just detta har varit ett problem, som har försenat F-35.

Ett problem är USA’s närmast makabra uppandlingstradition, där miljard efter miljard läggs ut på att bygga två konkurrerande prototyper.
I princip grundutvecklar man två st fpl istället för att sätta en spec. och sedan välja det konsortium som kan bygga effektivast och billigast uppfyllande uppställda kriterier.
Det rimliga hade varit att bygga två olika fpltyper men där radar, vapen etc delades.

Jag är av direkt motsatt uppfattning. Kostnaden för att ta fram en extra prototyp i JSF-projektet, var ungefär 1/1500-del av den beräknade totala projektkostnaden. Tidsåtgången för att ta fram prototyperna från kontrakt till första flygning var fyra år. Jag anser vidare att en kravspec inte ska vara för detaljerad i inledningsskedet. Bättre att ge konstruktionsteamen utrymme för att vara kreativa i inledningsskedet (därtill kanske med olika kravspecar, för olika företag, för att kunna utvärdera olika vägval) och sedan skapa en mera detaljerad kravspec allt eftersom.

Så i fallet USA (när vi pratar om flygplan som ska tillverkas i stora numerär) så vore det historiskt (ja i.a.f. från 1960-talet till 2000-talet, då den fysiska utvecklingen var relativt sansad) bättre att ha tagit höjd för två eller t.o.m. tre generationer med försöksflygplan/prototyper, från ~2-3 olika tillverkare i de olika stegen, där den första serien med försöksflygplan, ska handla om att försöka hitta vägen framåt och den sista, vara relativt nära serielik. I dag, så kan utvärderingen av olika konstruktioner göras via simuleringar och då minskar behovet av fysiska prototyper, för att utvärdera olika alternativ.

Nu har inte F-35A använts med jämlik numerär, utan de har ofta använts som ögon och öron åt 4+ generations jaktplan, eller i underlägsen numerär mot 4+ generations jaktplan, och reultatet har oftast blivit lika. Scenariot har vanligen varit att 4+ planen "skjutits ned" utan att de haft en aning om F-35rna.

Jämförelsen med 6 F-35 var ju en retorisk jämförelse, där man överdriveer för att få retorisk effekt.

----

Huruvida multistatisk passiv radar och andra nya tekniker lyckas ta fram stealthplanen är en annan femma.

Klart är att ryssarna inte lyckades med PAKFA, d.v.s. SU-57, då det stora planet enlig uppgift torde ha en radarprofil som motsvarar en F/A-18. Hur de kinesiska stealthplanen har lyckats, är ju ännu oklart. Signaturdämpningen, d.v.s. stealthen, beror ju delvis på planets form, delvis på ytmaterialet.

Jag tror nog att Sveriges flygvapen klarar av 6 stycken F-35 som ju inte ens kan hållas i full beredskap dygnet runt. Om inte annat så kan ju Sverige kvadda startbanan, där i Bodö.

Med detta sagt så är F-35 bevisligen ett mycket bra plan och det är också värt att notera att Gripen och F-35 aldrig kommer att strida mot varandra, det är istället mycket troligt att de båda planen kommer att komplettera varandra i diverse skarpa insatser världen över.

Istället för att öva mot varandra (annat än för teständamål) så bör Sverige och Norge samöva för att få ut det mesta av kombinationen av olika egenskaper.

Jag undrar var det finns att läsa om SU-57 radarprofil som motsvarar F/A-18?
Haru nåt tips?

Kommer inte ihåg var jag såg jämförelsen, men i denna artikel påstår att Hornet (tydligen E/F) har 1,0 m2 RCS och SU-57 0,5 m2.

http://mil-embedded.com/guest-blogs/radar-cross-section-the-measure-of-stealth/

Internetuppgifter skall alltid tas med en nypa salt, men konsensusen ser ut att vara att SU-57 inte är särskilt bra signaturdämpad.

Exakt det som är problemet med F-35. Den är suboptimerad för allt den skall göra.
Att grundutveklingen av extra fpl kostar 1/1500-del kan du gärna redovisa källor på. Om du menar 1/1500 del av utveckling inklusive serieflygplan inklusive vapen så måste du vara seriöst efterbliven.

De två prototyptillverkarna (Boeing och LockMart) fick vardera 750 miljoner USD för att ta fram var sin prototyp (X-32 och X-35).

Den totala utvecklingskostnaden beräknas till 55 miljarder USD, och produktionen av flygplan beräknas kosta c.a. 320 miljarder USD och de totala driftskostnader ~1100 miljarder ytterligare. Den totala programkostnaden beräknas till 1500 miljarder USD.

D.v.s. en extra prototyp kostade 750 miljoner USD, vilket ska ställas mot en total programkostnad på 1500 miljarder USD. D.v.s. 1/2000-del.

Så om den där extra prototypen innebar att flygplanen blev 1% billigare att tillverka, eller 0,1% billigare att flyga, elller 0,1% effektivare på att lösa sin uppgift, så var det väl investerade pengar.

http://www.jsf.mil/news/docs/20160324_Fact-Sheet.pdf

On the 16th of December, /r/Hoggit had a live Q&A session on their Discord server with "Gregory Brett", a naval aviator who has flown the Hornet, Super Hornet and F-35C. Gregory adhered to OPSEC by refusing to discuss tactics, weapons or (outside of general statements) mission systems, and he also didn't want to reveal his callsign or current squadron, but he still plenty of information to share.

Over the span of about 2 hours, a considerable number of questions were asked. I've collated all of those that seemed relevant to the F-35C (as well as a couple of others that are tangentially relevant to the future carrier air wing), cleaned them up a little (spelling, punctuation, etc) and listed them below. Some of the questions were also ambiguous as to platform (eg: #41, asking whether flaps are used during air-to-air refueling), but without additional context I couldn't rule out that he would be talking about his current platform (which I understand to be the F-35C).

Also please note that Gregory Brett wanted it to be clear that all of these answers are only representative of his own views and opinions, and should not be seen as representative of the views of the wider US government or Navy.

---

1. **Question:** Out of everything that you've flown, what is the most fun to fly?
**Answer:** The most fun I would say is the Legacy Hornet. Just a blue collar working man’s jet, super snappy, super agile, she'll do anything you ask of her!

2. **Question:** From a human factors perspective, what does the F-35C do better than the F-18E? What does it do worse?
**Answer:** The cockpit is much more ergonomic and roomier, the displays are completely customizable, the sidestick is what I prefer. Some things it doesn’t do as well as far as HF, you can’t pee easily in the jet, and it’s hard to enter data while taxiing.

3. **Question:** F/A-18 or F-35?
**Answer:** The two jets are apples and oranges. To just fly around and rage, F/A-18. To go downtown, F-35. Just my personal opinion. Both are a ton of fun to fly and very capable.

4. **Question:** What's your biggest pet peeve about the F-35?
**Answer:** Biggest pet peeve is that the jet is still immature. You sometimes have to troubleshoot by shutting the jet down and turning it back on. Once its mature, that won’t be a problem! It really is a great jet and that doesn’t happen often.

5. **Question:** How does it feel to fly an immature jet in that case, is it uncomfortable?
**Answer:** The jet is safe to fly, it's not IOC yet in the Navy. That's what I meant by immature. It's still an airplane, it’s just not the final product yet. I wouldn’t fly an unsafe plane and maintenance wouldn’t let me.

6. **Question:** As someone who only really ever hears people talking about how much of a cost overrun it is, I want to ask how you, as an actual pilot, find the F-35? How does it handle in comparison to the others jets you have flown, and how do all the sensors work to help the pilot?
**Answer:** I find the F-35 to be a great jet. It's super high tech. It's like flying a Tesla. It is a very well handling plane. It is as easy to fly as a Hornet (which itself is very easy to fly). The sensor fusion is great because I have a one stop shop for all my information on the glass, rather than checking multiple screens at once.

7. **Question:** What do you think is the biggest misconception about the F-35C?
**Answer:** I believe the biggest misconception is that it is built to be a dogfighter.

8. **Question:** You mentioned sensor fusion, how important is the sensor fusion functionality when flying and what things could be improved in it?
**Answer:** I can't get too deep into mission systems. SF is an important system for building SA in the cockpit.

9. **Question:** I've heard and read several comments by claimed USN pilots saying that the F-35C is an afterthought compared to the A and B variants, and that various issues resulting from its not being designed for USN carrier used first and foremost make it less suitable to the USN's needs than the Super Hornet. What are your thoughts on this? Do you think that the F-35C will be well-adapted to carrier operations?
**Answer:** The F-35B model was the tough problem to solve for engineers (and they solved it well!) that drove much of the design. The C model I think is awesome because it has a better wing (in my opinion) and more gas than the A model. It's been out at sea and doing an awesome job so far. I believe it will do great while integrated in the carrier airwing, especially as experience grows.

10. **Question:** What kind of opinions do you tend to see on the F-35C from your peers from the Hornet / Rhino worlds?
**Answer:** I see a lot of excitement (with a few skeptics).

11. **Question:** The F-35A has reportedly started to get the nickname “Panther”; I’ve also heard that during some developmental carrier trials the names “Reaper” and “Raven” have been floated for the F-35C but not gone far. Do you think the Navy might adopt “Panther” or is there another nickname that’s gathering traction in the Navy? (What do you think suits the jet?)
**Answer:** The callsign for the VFA-101 F-35C squadron is "Reaper". Air Force adopted Panther. We jokingly call it the "C Panther" (Sea panther...get it?) but not really. Thats not catching on with us. We call "lightning ball" at the boat.

12. **Question:** I have read about the plane being "see-through" with cameras and the visor working to enable the pilot to build more Situational awareness. Can you explain how this works, briefly, and how it is being used by the pilot?
**Answer:** the helmet uses the distributed aperture system (DAS) to feed IR image to the visor. You can turn this on and off with HOTAS. It is great for an alternate to night vision, and to enhance your SA.

13. **Question:** Why do you hate the F-35B so much. What did that poor thing do to deserve it?
**Answer:** No comment on the B model on here. It is a marvel of engineering; I will say that.

14. **Question:** How do you feel for the future of the F-35 being the replacement of the Hornet on the boats in the sea? Given its current state and budget in the program it's in and the capabilities it will supposedly bring.
**Answer:** The F-35C is the future. The Hornet is old. It needs to go. There’s a reason we don't fly the F-4 and A-6 anymore...technology advances and requirements change.

15. **Question:** Does the F-35C do direct lift or pitch pointing? What about direct sideforce or yaw pointing?
**Answer:** Ok so Magic Carpet (now called PLM "Precision Landing Mode") does 3 things. 1) New HUD Symbology 2) Integrated Direct Lift Control (IDLC) 3) two new modes of flying the plane. To address each of these:
1) The HUD now has a SRVV (Ship referenced (relative?) Velocity Vector). It takes into account the ships speed (which you enter) and the angled deck...it does the Trig for you and now you place the VV directly onto the landing area and that's where you will go. Additionally, there is a GRL (glideslope reference line) that you line up with the IFLOLS with a centred ball. I don't really pay as much attention to that one.
2) IDLC...this is where the magic is. When you enter PLM, the jet is now in a new control law. The FCS uses ALL the flight control surfaces to deflect to give you instantaneous lift creation and lift destruction. With the Flaps at Half or Full, they will not default to all the way down. They will leave wiggle room to deflect. If you watch a PLM pass, you will see the flight controls moving like crazy, In the Rhino it even kind of looks like a bird flapping its wings.
3) 2 new modes. PLM is flown in autothrottles. One is called Rate (APC in the F-35). This is where you pull the stick for instantaneous lift creation (or push for the opposite) and where ever you let go is where the jet will go. So if you push from 3 degrees to 4 degrees, it will stay at 4 degrees. The truly awesome mode is called Delta Path (DFP in the F-35). This is a glideslope on a spring. When this is engaged, the stick will set to a 3.5 degree glideslope (or whatever the IFLOLS is set to; you can change it). When you pull back on the stick, you will feel resistance and the ball will rise. When you let go, the jet snaps back to the perfect glideslope. The opposite for pushing to get lower.

16. **Question:** The Navy has talked about plans to (15+ years from now) replace the Super Hornet with an “F/A-XX”. With mind of budget constraints, what would you personally like to see a Rhino replacement look like or prioritise (speed, stealth, sensors, payload)?
**Answer:** I'd have to use my imagination a bit for that one. I would like it to have integration with all national assets, tons of gas and weapons carried internally, stealth, and speed. Supermaneuvrability is not a necessity but would be nice. That's a tall order for the engineers, so good luck.

17. **Question:** Would you rather fight a horse sized F/A-18C or a dozen duck sized F-35Cs?
**Answer:** No comment.

18. **Question:** Follow up, can you use IDLC outside the PLM?
**Answer:** You can in the F-35, in the landing configuration, but not nearly as dramatically or intentionally.

19. **Question:** How do you see the proliferation of unmanned systems affecting the carrier air wing? Do you think the MQ-25 open the door to stealthy strike UCAVs? How much opposition (to adding unmanned systems) is there from the naval aviator community?
**Answer:** There is not much opposition now because it is not that imminent. Personally, I love the idea of an unmanned tanker. That way you don’t put hours and fatigue on the Rhinos for a non-tactical mission.

20. **Question:** Has anyone tried to use IDLC in BFM/ACM yet?
**Answer:** You don’t just "use" IDLC; It doesn’t work that way. You fly what the FCS gives you.

21. **Question:** What is in your opinion the strong point of the F-35 over its competitors (Rafale, Gripen, etc).
**Answer:** By far its the fact that it can go into contested environments. That is no-kidding true. Combine that with the F-35C that has a ton of gas and minimal drag... it can be used on a contested strike where other jets can’t go.

22. **Question:** Do you prefer the almost all digital cockpit controls (big touchscreen up front) of the F-35 or the traditional mix of digital displays and physical controls? If any, what are some things that you find traditional cockpits do better?
**Answer:** Some things I do like about physical controls knobs and switches. Many of the old switches from the Hornet got replaced by pushing a button on the glass. I like that because it cleans up the cockpit, but I do miss the old Hook Handle and Probe Switch. That said, there is no flap switch! Just like in the F-16.

23. **Question:** In one of the interviews with Mike Dozer (F-15C Pilot), he mentioned that pilots usually shoot 2 missiles at a single target to up the pK. Does this also apply nowadays to you and the Navy?
**Answer:** Logically, more missiles improves your odds. Can’t say more than that.

24. **Question:** What are your thoughts on the risk of single-engine aircraft in blue-water operations? Has engine tech progressed far enough that this isn't a major problem for the F-35?
**Answer:** The single engine originally gave me pause. That said, I have complete confidence that it is suitable for carrier and blue water ops. The tech is THAT good. I flew routinely 100-200 miles off shore in training without a second thought. Or even a first thought. Two engines are nice, and I would take it if it were possible. But this is the plane we have, and It's proven to be exceptionally reliable. I have additional reasons to believe that but I can’t get into it here.

25. **Question:** Do you have any interesting stories, about your F-35C flying experience (in training missions, etc), that you can share?
**Answer:** Not that I can share at this time.

26. **Question:** The [F-35C] touch screens - are they capacitive touch screens? how well do your flight gloves interact with them? Do you need specific flight gloves for the touch screen functionality? same question goes with the UFC on the Super Hornet.
**Answer:** For the PCDs on the F-35, not sure if they are capacitive or not. I didn't wear gloves (whoops). For the UFCD on the Rhino, it is a plane of light about 1/8 inch off the surface. Depending where you break the light determines what button you hit. Gloves or no gloves and it works.

27. **Question:** How were you able to be selected to fly the F-35C? or did you sign up on some roster?
**Answer:** I had a list of possible assignments after one of my tours for what I wanted to do next. F-35 pilot is what I put at the top of my list.

28. **Question:** Do you miss the HUD on the F-35C?
**Answer:** I actually like the HMD vHUD. It works the same way, its super high tech. It's great.

29. **Question:** What is your opinion of automated/semi-automated carrier landing avionics (magic carpet and the like)?
**Answer:** Magic Carpet is NOT automated. You are still flying the plane! ACLS Mode 1 is an auto-land. I think PLM is a great tool that increases safety

30. **Question:** Have F-35C (and/or B) squadrons had the chance to do their equivalent of Hornet Ball / cruise videos? (Obviously they'd be for internal viewing only for now). Is there a "Lightning Ball" moniker for those videos / events?
**Answer:** You won’t see any in cockpit GoPro footage or camera footage of 5th gen aircraft. The F-35C is included in the west coast ball.

31. **Question:** Do the Super Hornet or F-35 use tactile "display" systems (i.e. information can be displayed to the pilot via the sense of feeling, presumably by means of the flight suit)? What are your thoughts on it, whether hypothetically or from experience?
**Answer:** I have no experience of that, nor does anybody that I Know. That said, I think it could be useful during the administrative portions of flight, but more distracting in the tactical phases. Again, just an opinion.

32. **Question:** I know you're F-35C, but for the A model (and pod on the others), if you could trade in the gun for a single AIM-9X, would you? How about a twin 9x installation?
**Answer:** It depends on the mission. I think I would most want the gun for strafing the ground, personally. That's just me though. So for a mission where I may strafe, I'd want the gun. If it was A/A, I may do without the gun, depending on the mission planning factors. Just personal opinion.

33. **Question:** Did you ever have a chance to exercise in TOPGUN or Red Flag?
**Answer:** Topgun is not something you exercise in. It is a school for training "patchwearers" and an institution that develops and writes up tactics. Only a small percentage go. That said, I have gone to Fallon, where TG is, and do many exercises up there, many involving patchwearers on the blue and red side. I have not participated in a red flag. I unfortunately showed up to my squadron just after they did a RF Alaska. Would’ve been awesome.

34. **Question:** On a scale of 1-10, how game changing is DAS in ACM?
**Answer:** No comment, but it is an effective tool.

35. **Question:** Can you see ATC radar on your RWR and if you can what does it show up as?
**Answer:** I have not seen ATC radar on the RWR, not sure if there is a way to or not. Actually, it's possible I may have and didn't even know it!

36. **Question:** What was the toughest adjustment you had to make transitioning to the F-35C and what were the biggest similarities?
**Answer:** Biggest adjustment was some of the Pilot Vehicle Interface. For example, the TDC is now at your thumb. You just have to look at different places for different information. You pick it up quick though.

37. **Question:** External LO weapons pods - yes or no?
**Answer:** I think that would be cool if they did that.

38. **Question:** Have you ever flown the B variant and experienced the SVTOL? (Not sure if it’s on the C variant) and if so, was it a weird feeling not doing a traditional take-off the first time?
**Answer:** I've flown the B model sim and did use the STOVL. It was educational to say the least. Way outside my comfort zone, but the jet made it super easy!

39. **Question:** It’s been mentioned that you are also an LSO, what was the lowest grade that you give out for a pilot and what mistake did he make?
**Answer:** Cut Pass for Idle in the Wires.

40. **Question:** Is that for not going full burner after catching the wire?
**Answer:** Only the legacy hornet can go to full burner in the wires (With the option of mil). The Rhino and F-35 only go to MIL. If you see burner in the wires on YouTube for those 2 planes they made a mistake. The idle in the wires means not going to at least mil.

41. **Question:** When refuelling mid-air, do you use a similar flaps setting as the Harriers? I believe they use STOL flaps for that.
**Answer:** Flaps auto.

42. **Question:** Unmanned battle buddy- would you rather it carried more fuel or more weapons?
**Answer:** Too simplistic. I guess more weapons? Never thought about that hypothetical before?