F-35 Lightning II: News thread

GarryB wrote:Well this is going to change things for planning for the Russians... do they need an LMFS now if there are not going to be 3,500 F-35s to face?

GarryB wrote:It is the oldest trick in the book to say if you buy x number of thousand we can reduce the price because orders will be spread across more aircraft so your spare parts pool can be smaller because the odds of all your planes having the same problems and needing the same parts at one time is low

No. It's because production and tooling for production is expensive (including training for staff and laborers). If you get large orders, proportionally the tooling and production prices go down. Lastly, it is used as an economic incentive to buy more of the same.

Backman wrote:
Switzerland Chooses F-35 As Its Next Fighter Jet

JohninMK wrote:

Backman wrote:
Switzerland Chooses F-35 As Its Next Fighter Jet

Lockheed offered the best 'cash back' deal

Backman wrote:Why do they have to insult our intelligence like this ? Its all part of the plan to sucker the next one. Hey its cheap. Put the word cheap in all the propaganda.

F-35 program office announces a ‘strategic pause’ on new logistics system

WASHINGTON — The Defense Department is pausing its efforts to field replacement software for the F-35′s troubled logistics system due to a lack of funding, the head of the F-35 program office said Thursday.

In 2020, the F-35 program executive office announced plans to develop a replacement for the Lockheed Martin-made Autonomic Logistics Information System currently used by maintenance crews to perform functions such as ordering spare parts or logging repair work.

Known as the Operational Data Integrated Network, or ODIN, the new system would combine hardware produced by Lockheed with software coded by the government, allowing the Defense Department to retain more control over the system.

But because of a 42 percent cut to ODIN’s development and testing funding in fiscal year 2021, the program office has decided to take a “strategic pause” in ODIN’s software development effort, said Lt. Gen. Eric Fick, F-35 program executive officer.

“Despite all the positive activities, we underestimated the complexity of deprecating ALIS capabilities while migrating to ODIN and learned several important lessons,” Fick said in April 22 testimony before the House Armed Services Committee.


For years, ALIS has ranked as one of the F-35 enterprise’s biggest headaches. The Government Accountability Office has repeatedly documented problems, such as a bulky “deployable” version of ALIS that cannot connect to the internet or incorrectly signaling to maintainers that a plane is not mission capable due to incorrect data.

“We need to continue to improve the functionality of ALIS in the near term, as we ensure that the ODIN structure that we put into place, from a hardware perspective, from a data environment perspective, and from a software perspective, is what the users need,” Fick told lawmakers during the hearing.

In late 2020, the program office developed an ODIN user agreement and capability needs statement, which lays out what tasks ODIN needs to be able to accomplish and how the system should function, he said.

In addition, “The JPO and Lockheed Martin established a contract that captured data rights, frequent software deliveries, and proper data marking for modern software development,” Fick stated in testimony.

Fick’s testimony did not address when the program office intends to restart ODIN software development efforts, saying only that the JPO will update its plan based on available funding, inputs from the services and its finalized strategy for migrating from ALIS to ODIN.

However, ODIN hardware development is moving forward. Lockheed delivered the first hardware kit for testing at Marine Corps Air Station Yuma in September.

“The new kit is 75 percent smaller, weighs 90 percent less than the current hardware, and is projected to be 30 percent cheaper. In addition to the smaller footprint, we are seeing significant performance improvements in ALIS such as data processing and synchronization times 2-3 times faster than ever seen before,” Fick wrote in testimony.

The program office plans to roll out additional kits this summer, which will save money by being able to host multiple squadrons on a single unit, Fick said. The Defense Department plans to invest $471 million into both ALIS and ODIN over the next five years.

Finty wrote:Cheers Gary.

The logic I think was that the entry to service would be more gradual, allowing for production to be ramped up later with reduced startup costs and faults could be ironed out before all aircraft were in service. Therefore, aircraft could enter service sooner, albeit with limited capabilities. They obviously didn’t intend for ALIS to be so crap, among other things.

They obviously didn’t intend for ALIS to be so crap, among other things.

HASC Won’t Plus Up F-35 Request in Fiscal 2022 Budget

April 22, 2021 | By John A. Tirpak
The 97 F-35s added to service budgets over the last five years are a “self-inflicted wound,” as they have played havoc with sustainment, House Armed Services Committee tactical air and land forces and readiness panel leaders said in a joint April 22 hearing. They vowed not to compound the problem by adding extra jets beyond the services’ requests in the fiscal 2022 budget, and perhaps not thereafter.

“I can assure you that this year, if anybody suggests a plus-up” of service requests for F-35 fighters, “there will be one hell of a fight, and I don’t propose to lose it,” said Rep. John Garamendi (D-Calif.), chair of the readiness subcommittee, who offered similar warnings at a recent hearing of his own subcommittee. Garamendi said he has “allies” in his thinking.

Tac Air chairman Rep. Donald Norcross (D-N.J.) voiced the committee’s concern that sustainment of the F-35 is far exceeding what the services have budgeted, and it’s “unaffordable” in the case of the Air Force.

The problem could “result in a 47 percent reduction in the Air Force planned inventory goal of 1,763 aircraft, just to remain in their budget,” Norcross said.

If the program “continues to fail to significantly control and reduce” sustainment costs, “we may need to invest in other, more affordable programs, and backfill an operational shortfall of potentially over 800 fighters.” Norcross noted that “we don’t have unlimited resources” and that he “would not support any request for additional aircraft beyond what is contained in this year’s President’s Budget request.”

In recent years, the Air Force has requested 48 F-35s a year, but Congress has upped that to 60. Witnesses in the hearing said the additional aircraft strained the repair, sustainment, and depot system with unplanned volume, and also challenged parts and materials vendors to meet the demands of both production and maintenance.

Garamendi drew a breath and said, “I’m going to … try to contain my anger at what is going on here.” The F-35 is “over budget, fails to deliver on promised capabilities, [and] mission capability rates do not even begin to meet the service threshholds.”

He warned witnesses, “the easy days of the past are over.” The “industry solution” of asking taxpayers “to throw money at the problem … will not happen.” He vowed that the F-35’s sustainment issues will be addressed and “resolved in this committee, this year.” Witnesses included Gregory M. Ulmer, Lockheed Martin vice president for aeronautics; Matthew F. Bromberg, president of Pratt & Whitney military engines; Joint Program Office Director Lt. Gen. Eric T. Fick; Air Force F-35 Integration Office Director Brig. Gen. David W. Abba, and the Government Accountability Office’s Diana Maurer, director of military structure and operations issues.

Asked to estimate the additional costs of the extra jets, Fick said “100 extra aircraft, at 250 hours [per year is] 25,000 extra hours,” at a cost, in today’s dollars, of over $41,000 per hour.

“That is added sustainment cost being borne by the services that they otherwise wouldn’t have to bear,” he said. This has “hurt us from a supply perspective.”

Maurer put the 47 percent overage in context:

“If, starting tomorrow, Lockheed Martin and Pratt & Whitney announced that all spare parts would be free for the rest of the program, that still would not be sufficient to close the gap” in sustainment costs. “Bottom line, …the services have a plane they cannot afford to fly; at least not in the way they want to fly it, long term.”

There are three possible ways forward, she said.

“Squeeze more cost savings” out of the program, which she said would be difficult because the structure of fees, sustainability rates, and other measures are “baked in,” and were based on optimistic thinking 20 years ago.
“Take a hard look at requirements” in terms of flying hours, readiness, and the number of aircraft to be bought. These are “significant tradeoffs,” she allowed, adding that GAO does not have a position on any of those tradeoffs.
“Simply … spend more.” The sustainment targets were set by the services, and they can change them, she said. But that could potentially cost “billions more. That could potentially crowd out other priorities.” She advised Congress to “pay close attention to how the program is closing these capability gaps when you decide how many new aircraft to purchase.”
Ulmer noted that Lockheed and the JPO have pushed to open 60 depots by 2030. Although that will help with repair and rework, it also has taxed the availability of spares and trained maintainers because they are spread out over a greater number of locations.

“This is at the heart of why we have a supply problem,” Fick observed. “We also had a couple of years were we didn’t buy any spares, and that hurt us, too.”

As production hits peak, and “as we crest that wave, and we’re leveling out, we’ve proven we can make” the ordered number of aircraft. “We just need to settle at that rate, allow the system to recover, deliver the parts that we need, follow through with our commitments to stand up the organic depots inside the U.S. and [overseas], that will help us from a global capacity perspective to fill out the solution around the world.”

Garamendi slightly softened his tone at the end of the hearing, thanking the managers for their efforts and saying, “We’re all in this together.”

While the U.S. Marine Corps says its first squadron of F-35 Joint Strike Fighters is fully equipped and ready for war, the Air Force and Navy need more time to catch up.

With a carrier deployment anticipated sometime next year, Marine Fighter Attack Squadron (VMFA) 314 of Marine Corps Air Station Miramar, California, said earlier this month that its fifth-generation F-35C jets have achieved full operational capability, known as FOC -- meaning they're ready for full operations.

Advertisement
Experts believe that could be because the Marine Corps chose to buy far fewer of the C aircraft than the Navy and Air Force purchased of their variants, letting the Marine Corps reach the operational breakthrough faster.

Read Next: Study Finds Beard Waivers Slow Promotion, Mostly Affecting Black Airmen

While the Marine Corps has not disclosed how many F-35Cs the squadron has now, the service plans to buy 67 F-35Cs at most for use on carriers, according to the 2019 USMC Aviation Plan. The Air Force, meanwhile, has a projected buy of 1,763 jets, and the Navy 273 of its carrier-capable Cs. The Marine Corps also plans to buy 353 F-35B short takeoff and vertical landing models.

Advertisement
"It speaks to the more limited roles the Marines expect to use the plane for," said a congressional staffer with longtime knowledge of military aviation. The staffer asked not to be identified because they are not authorized to speak to the press.

"The Marines now have enough experience with the jet to understand what it can and can't do and how they have to operate it," they said, adding that it doesn't mean there are no bugs or fixes that still need to be taken care of.

All the jet variants are awaiting the latest update to the F-35's avionics and weapons systems, upgrades that began in 2018. The update is meant to expand the type of weapons the aircraft can carry, among other improvements.

"There are still all kinds of kinks to be worked out even after FOC," said Richard Aboulafia, vice president and analyst at the Teal Group, referring to the upgrade. "But at least this is a significant milestone on the road to readiness, and perhaps even maturity."

How the Navy and Air Force stack up
The Marine Corps has been first to reach a number of F-35 milestones, but unlike the F-35C variant, its sibling F-35B model has yet to be deemed fully ready for combat.

The service's F-35B was first to achieve basic certification in 2015, which means the plane can fly patrols and conduct basic strikes but not more advanced missions, ahead of the Navy and Air Force. In 2018, the F-35B made its combat debut, conducting its first strike in Afghanistan.

But each service sets its own requirements for declaring their aircraft operational based on a number of factors, including the level of training personnel receive and the number of squadrons flying the aircraft.

The Air Force is not expected to declare full capability for its F-35A conventional take-off and landing jet until two combat bases are fully operational with the appropriate amount of trained personnel, said Air Combat Command spokeswoman Alexi Worley in an email last week. Those two bases in this case are Hill Air Force Base, Utah and Eielson Air Force Base, Alaska.

Worley said that the Air Force will wait until Eielson joins Hill in both having its F-35s on hand and getting its personnel fully trained to take care of the aircraft before the service declares the planes are fully operational.

Eielson only began accepting F-35s last year. The 354th Fighter Wing accepted its first two Lightning II aircraft last April, and have built up to 25 jets since then. A total of 54 are scheduled to arrive by December 2021. Hill, meanwhile, has 78 jets.

"At this point, we don't have an exact timeline for when those requirements will be met and that declaration will happen," Worley said.

The Navy only has one deployable F-35C squadron -- Strike Fighter Squadron 147 "Argonauts" out of Naval Air Station Lemoore, California. The Navy's other F-35C squadron, Strike Fighter Squadron 125, a training squadron, is also out of Lemoore.

The Argonauts will deploy with the Carl Vinson Carrier Strike Group later this summer, Cmdr. Zach Harrell, spokesperson for Commander, Naval Air Forces, said in an email Monday. The unit is anticipated to be fully ready for combat "as planned within the next four years," he said.

Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 314 nevertheless is proud of its recent fulfillment.