some F35 info

[GreenKnight121]

I just ran across a neat article about a recent USMC exercise in SoCal involving an F-35B, a MV-22B, UH-1Ys, and a USN MH-60R: https://www.twz.com/sea/how-f-35s-deployed-to-a-narrow-highway-in-california

What tickled me was one particular comment in the article by VMX-1's Operational Test Director, Lt. Col. Robert 'Champ' Guyette... ""I'm really excited. One of the things I didn't anticipate coming to this job was how excited I would be to learn how to kill submarines. Marines just like killing everything, you know, I mean, it's what we do. And so the opportunity to kill something new is exciting. And so submarines are on the menu now for the Marine Corps."

One of the postings in the comments said "This might be just about the most Marine thing I have ever read. So this is why they gave space to the AF instead of the Navy... Can't trust the Marines not to initiate a hostile "first contact" when presented with the opportunity to put a new species on the menu.".

Here is where this exercise took place - look in the upper left of the area shot between the Provost Marshal's Office access and Vista Point , then note the area in the red box in the close-up:

 

[GrauGeist]

They've used that old section of Pacific Coast Highway for Ops in the past.

Back when I lived in SoCal, they staged AV8s and CH53s along that stretch of old highway during exercises.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

The U.S. Air Force would receive enough money to buy 51 F-35A fighter jets in fiscal 2024 under the compromise Pentagon spending bill lawmakers released Thursday — three more than the service originally requested.

If enacted, the allotment would mark the most Joint Strike Fighters the Air Force has bought in a single year since 2021, when it procured 60. The service had included 48 F-35As in its fiscal 2024 budget request.

The FY24 defense appropriations bill would provide the Air Force more than $5.2 billion for F-35A procurement, an increase of nearly $361 million over the original budget request. The program increase of three additional F-35As would account for $277 million of that growth.

The purchase would still remain far below the minimum annual buy of 72 F-35s the service argued for years it needed to modernize its fighter fleet, while keeping up with the pace of older jets leaving the inventory. The Air Force plans to buy more than 1,700 F-35As, totaling nearly $250 billion, over the life of the program, according to FY25 budget documents.

Congress in FY24 also looks to give the Marine Corps and Navy funds for 16 short-takeoff-and-vertical-landing F-35Bs as well as 19 F-35Cs, which can take off and land from aircraft carriers.

Congress offers procurement boost for F-35 jets in FY24 spending bill

The U.S. Air Force would receive enough money to buy 51 F-35As in fiscal 2024 under the compromise defense spending bill lawmakers released.

www.airforcetimes.com

 

[cvairwerks]

And in the proposed 2025FY budget, they are wacking 18 a/c for the Navy and Marines.....

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

Metal shavings in contaminated fuel, incorrectly assembled parts, and a plastic scraper protruding from a wing fold were among the faults discovered in five new F-35C Joint Strike Fighters delivered to a U.S. Marine Corps fighter squadron in California in 2023, according to a memo obtained by Defense News.

Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 311, or VMFA-311, at Marine Corps Air Station Miramar in San Diego discovered an array of problems with its Lockheed Martin-made F-35s that ultimately required more than 700 hours of work to fix and wasted more than 169,000 pounds of fuel, the Jan. 7 memo said.

On Dec. 7, for instance, a plastic scraper was discovered protruding from the wing fold of one of the squadron's jets, after the jet had flown, the memo noted. The 5.5-inch scraper was discovered during a post-flight inspection on the jet and fell to the ground.

[...]

All five jets had fuel contaminated with Krytox, a high-temperature lubricating grease, the memo said, and three jets also had metal shavings in their fuel. The jets had to be defueled and refueled two or three times to get the fuel quality up to an acceptable level, with the jets that had metal shavings requiring an extra defueling cycle, the memo added.

[...]

And multiple parts in the jets — including power and thermal management system controllers, electronic units, and an electric-hydrostatic actuator on a jet's trailing edge flap — failed, forcing the squadron to remove and replace them, the memo added.

One jet's left main gear brake assembly also failed, another fighter's panoramic cockpit display failed and yet another jet's backup oxygen system bottle was leaking, the memo stated. All components also needed to be removed and replaced.

Marine unit found metal shavings in F-35 fuel, plastic tool in wing

In a memo obtained by Defense News, a Marine Corps squadron commander raises the alarm about the quality of Lockheed Martin's new F-35C jets.

www.marinecorpstimes.com

 

[buffnut453]

Metal shavings in contaminated fuel, incorrectly assembled parts, and a plastic scraper protruding from a wing fold were among the faults discovered in five new F-35C Joint Strike Fighters delivered to a U.S. Marine Corps fighter squadron in California in 2023, according to a memo obtained by Defense News.

Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 311, or VMFA-311, at Marine Corps Air Station Miramar in San Diego discovered an array of problems with its Lockheed Martin-made F-35s that ultimately required more than 700 hours of work to fix and wasted more than 169,000 pounds of fuel, the Jan. 7 memo said.

On Dec. 7, for instance, a plastic scraper was discovered protruding from the wing fold of one of the squadron's jets, after the jet had flown, the memo noted. The 5.5-inch scraper was discovered during a post-flight inspection on the jet and fell to the ground.

[...]

All five jets had fuel contaminated with Krytox, a high-temperature lubricating grease, the memo said, and three jets also had metal shavings in their fuel. The jets had to be defueled and refueled two or three times to get the fuel quality up to an acceptable level, with the jets that had metal shavings requiring an extra defueling cycle, the memo added.

[...]

And multiple parts in the jets — including power and thermal management system controllers, electronic units, and an electric-hydrostatic actuator on a jet's trailing edge flap — failed, forcing the squadron to remove and replace them, the memo added.

One jet's left main gear brake assembly also failed, another fighter's panoramic cockpit display failed and yet another jet's backup oxygen system bottle was leaking, the memo stated. All components also needed to be removed and replaced.

Marine unit found metal shavings in F-35 fuel, plastic tool in wing

In a memo obtained by Defense News, a Marine Corps squadron commander raises the alarm about the quality of Lockheed Martin's new F-35C jets.

www.marinecorpstimes.com

Hmmm...I didn't know the Brewster Aeronautical Corporation made the F-35!

 

[GrauGeist]

This almost sounds deliberate.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

This almost sounds deliberate.

Not at all. This is what happens when schedule is king.

 

[cvairwerks]

Also happens when both the customer and the producer get complacent.....

 

[ThomasP]

Some update info on UK procurement of the F-35:

"British F-35 fleet to increase to 74 aircraft by 2033"

 

[ThomasP]

An article on the modern (post-Vietnam) development of US drop tanks. It is an industry article from 2011 but interesting as it relates a trend and has a bit of info on the (then) proposed F-35 drop tank.

"Carrier-capable, all-composite external fuel tank"

 

[Admiral Beez]

Some update info on UK procurement of the F-35:

"British F-35 fleet to increase to 74 aircraft by 2033"

2033? To reach two complete CAGs?

Over 13 years after HMS Prince of Wales entered service.

Jeez.

 

[Admiral Beez]

This almost sounds deliberate.

Do we know why the FAA F-35 crashed?

 

[ThomasP]

re the RN F-35 crash

i could not find the final report, but this is from the interim report:

"Conclusion

8. Based on the evidence obtained, the Panel is confident that the primary causal factor of the event was the left-hand intake blank remaining in the aircraft prior to launch reducing the engine power. This was most likely due to a combination of human, organisational and procedural factors. Nevertheless, the inquiry continues to pursue a standard of evidence that will allow other lines of inquiry to be addressed across a range of possible causes. The Panel is focussing on potential mechanisms of movement of the intake blank and comparisons of UK servicing procedures with other F-35 operating nations."

According to the report, a single engine intake blank was observed floating in the water as the ship passed the sinking aircraft - said intake blank was recovered.

"https://assets.publishing.service.g.../1099593/20220819-ZM152_SI_Interim_Report.pdf"

 

[Admiral Beez]

That seems like Murphy's Law. If we make it reasonably possible to screw up, it will happen.

How dislodged engine intake cover downed UK F-35B in carrier mishap

Procedural shortcomings around the removal and stowage of protective engine intake covers aboard the Royal Navy (RN) aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth led to the UK's loss of a Lockheed Martin F-35B on take-off, a formal investigation has concluded.

www.flightglobal.com

"The panel concluded that it was almost certain that wind dislodged the left intake blank in BK-18 from its installed position and moved it to a point at which it could not be seen externally on the night of 16 November," the report says. Once dislodged, the cover is believed to have moved to "the front face of the engine compressor", where it remained for the aircraft launch. The investigation team notes that "items located in the intake duct could only be discovered by someone climbing into the intake to look, not just observing from the ground".

The engine covers or blanks should be visible. Like these.

 

[Holtzauge]

That seems like Murphy's Law. If we make it reasonably possible to screw up, it will happen.

How dislodged engine intake cover downed UK F-35B in carrier mishap

Procedural shortcomings around the removal and stowage of protective engine intake covers aboard the Royal Navy (RN) aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth led to the UK's loss of a Lockheed Martin F-35B on take-off, a formal investigation has concluded.

www.flightglobal.com

"The panel concluded that it was almost certain that wind dislodged the left intake blank in BK-18 from its installed position and moved it to a point at which it could not be seen externally on the night of 16 November," the report says. Once dislodged, the cover is believed to have moved to "the front face of the engine compressor", where it remained for the aircraft launch. The investigation team notes that "items located in the intake duct could only be discovered by someone climbing into the intake to look, not just observing from the ground".

The engine covers or blanks should be visible. Like these.

View attachment 780973

I know it's always easy to criticize things with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, but really, how could even a design like that pass muster?

First of all, it looks like it's not visible from all angles. Should have red parts protruding so it can be seen from both side and angles behind, not only from the front.

Second, the design should be like on a manhole: A manhole is circular not only because you get no stress concentrations in the corners, it's also circular so you can't take it lose and drop it into the hole.

And since an F35 costs in the order of a $100 M, I will be magnanimous and design one for them for the modest sum of $1M. The Pentagon can PM me here for details, and I promise to have it done over the weekend.

 

[cvairwerks]

That seems like Murphy's Law. If we make it reasonably possible to screw up, it will happen.

How dislodged engine intake cover downed UK F-35B in carrier mishap

Procedural shortcomings around the removal and stowage of protective engine intake covers aboard the Royal Navy (RN) aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth led to the UK's loss of a Lockheed Martin F-35B on take-off, a formal investigation has concluded.

www.flightglobal.com

"The panel concluded that it was almost certain that wind dislodged the left intake blank in BK-18 from its installed position and moved it to a point at which it could not be seen externally on the night of 16 November," the report says. Once dislodged, the cover is believed to have moved to "the front face of the engine compressor", where it remained for the aircraft launch. The investigation team notes that "items located in the intake duct could only be discovered by someone climbing into the intake to look, not just observing from the ground".

The engine covers or blanks should be visible. Like these.

Depends on which covers were installed at the time. There are inlet plugs like shown and there are exterior covers that are pinned to the structure and do not go within the inlet. The front face of the engine can not be see while standing on the ground or carrier deck. You have to actually enter the duct and crawl about half way down it to see the engine.

Exterior covers:

F-35 Lightning fighter jet stock photo. Image of nato - 131081408

Photo about F-35 Lightning fighter jet. Image of nato, close, airplane - 131081408

www.dreamstime.com

 

[Admiral Beez]

Depends on which covers were installed at the time. There are inlet plugs like shown and there are exterior covers that are pinned to the structure and do not go within the inlet.

Nothing that's intended to go into the inlet should allow the engine to still start up and run. How come my 1990's garage door has a sensor to tell me something is in the way, but a billion dollar fighter does not have a sensor to tell the pilot there's an object in the inlet? Isn't there supposed to be an Inlet Debris Monitoring System (IDMS)?

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/224639744_Gas_path_debris_monitoring_for_F-35_Joint_Strike_Fighter_propulsion_system_PHM

 

[GrauGeist]

Machines are only as good as those who operate and maintain them.

Countless examples of mistakes made by crew (and pilots) who fail to do their full checklist.

A classic example is the time when a USN F4 Phantom of VF-14 launched with it's wings folded...

 

[cvairwerks]

Don't think the IDMS ever proved out and made it past the lab research stage. One can only do so much when there are humans in the loop....In this case, night ops crew partially prepped the jet and days took over without any direct handoff it appears. No one did a red gear check prior to releasing the jet either. From the report, it seems that the same thing happened to at least one other jet that morning, but was discovered prior to engine start. Lots of chances to break the accident chain, but none happened.