Second time’s a charm for Eglin F-35

Second time’s a charm for Eglin F-35

Technical issues cut short the first F-35 Lightning II “orientation” flight down at Eglin AFB, but the second one went off just fine, Lockheed Martin announced on Tuesday.

The company’s announcement detailed the specifics for the second attempt and showed how much more growth is still to come for Eglin as the new center of all things F-35. Here it is in its entirety:

U.S. Marine Corps Maj. Joseph Bachmann successfully piloted the second F-35 local orientation flight in the skies above the Emerald Coast today. AF-13, an F-35A conventional takeoff and landing variant, launched at 2:30 p.m. CDT and completed a 93-minute flight landing at 4:03 p.m. CDT.

At its operational peak, the F-35 Integrated Training Center at Eglin Air Force Base will train approximately 100 F-35 pilots and 2,200 maintainers annually. The wing’s two F-35 pilots, in conjunction with its integrated team of military members, civilians and contractors, will begin to slowly build up their number of sorties with an initial goal of flying twice a week for the first couple of weeks and then steadily increasing the weekly sortie count.

Lockheed and program officials seem eager to sell the story that the F-35 is here now, today, and isn’t just part of a PowerPoint diagram where everything on the battlefield is connected by little lightning bolts. Don’t be surprised if you starting hearing about how many hours the jets have flown over the Panhandle along with the many test points — hundreds and thousands of test points! — it is blowing through in its development.

What supporters of this jet really need is for an F-35 to save a puppy somehow, or pull a child from a well, or star, as reported, in the “Top Gun” sequel with Tom Cruise. Lockheed and the Pentagon have to sell the F-35 to a general audience … could one be a Transformer, maybe? … because many of its critics within the defense world are fed up with it. We saw this week where the program boss, Vice Adm. David Venlet, just wants to be left alone to develop his airplane. That he needed to make such a case shows the worry that even amid positive news, he won’t be.

Join the Conversation

I believe the F35B variant was in Live Free or Die Harder with Bruce Willis (2007). It is a star! :)

It was. It could magically Hoover around I don’t remember exactly but Bruce also magically shot it down.

I think he first orientation flight last week was cut short immediately by a fuel leak warning? baby eagle

What’s the alternative? Legacy aircraft are not going to cut it.

F-35 reporting process:




Congratulations, LM & F-35 PM. Drink your champagne & pat yourselves on the back for doing the job we are paying you to do in accomplishing this inchstone. Before you get your cookie though, when is IOC?

I saw it fly over yesterday and man is that thing loud!! Appeared to be doing 3 to 4g turns in the pattern.

Despite some progress on the flight test side the problems seem to be coming at least as quickly as they are being resolved. Looking at the LOT 5 pricing I am incredibly skeptical that this will ever be affordable for 2443 aircraft across the model range.

When the SARs come out expect the acqusition proce to top $400B…

Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition!

New F-35 LRIP 5 Contract: Unit Costs Tops $200 Million.
F-35 A Cost: $172 Million
F-35B Cost: $291.7 Million
F-35C Cost $ 235.8 Million

Average Cost: $209.6 Million

F-22A $120 — 140 Million and it actually Flies!!!

No surprise they fixed the fuel leakage problem. The real game begins when they test the planes max envelope.

So, it can actually fly for 93 whole minutes without falling out of the sky even once — Well, isn’t that special!

F/A-18E/F Super Hornet Block II Cost: $53 Million
F/A-18E/F Super Hornet International Cost: $60 Million
F-16E/F Fighting Falcon Block 60 Cost: $80 Million
F-15SE Silent Eagle Cost: $100 Million
F-22A Raptor Cost: $120 — 140 Million

F-35A Cost: $172 Million
F-35B Cost: $291.7 Million
F-35C Cost: $ 235.8 Million

Some how I’m just not seeing a proportional cost to capability ratio here. For every 1 F-35C we could make 4.7 Super Hornets. For every 1 F-35B we could make 6 Super Hornets. Something is seriously wrong with this picture. The Super Hornet with the International Roap Map upgrades has six improvements that make it just as good as the F-35:

1. Conformal fuel tanks. Give it an unrefueled range roughly equal to the F-35.
2. Internal IRST.
3. Glass Cockpit display.
4. EPE upgraded engines that increase thrust by 20%.
5. Stealthy weapons pod for internal carriage. Give it a frontal RCS roughly equal in stealth to the F-35.
6. Spherical scanning IR sensors that provide missile warning and picture roughly equal to the F-35.

cock in cockpit was bleeped

It is all obsolete… until you all need it. That is all. And for the cost, you know damn well the technology is going to raise the cost, and every time we lower orders for this jet, the price goes up. Basic economics.
Semper Fi

>And for the cost, you know damn well the technology is going to raise the cost, and every time we lower orders for this jet, the price goes up. Basic economics.

Yep that is what happens when 80% of the cost of the jet is fixed price management overheads not parts and labor.

If you order zero LRIP aircraft from Lockheed, they still send you a bill for $5.1 billion.

Why do we need the F35? The only enemies we have are Arab– the old F4C can handle that threat. We need to cut the DOD in half right now to save the country. Bureaucracy is winning over combat need.

I’d like to see a compelling argument for the vital military necessity of a stealthy, $200M+ STOVL CAS jet that will eat up O&S money at a minimum of twice the rate for an F/A-18E. Please.

And please don’t try to tell me that a combat-ready ‘Bee’ will ever be available for under $200M. The price will never go down by more than a third, esp when you consider all the serious issues that still need to be addressed.

Don’t know how to comment. I see many use the A triple G C approach. Accuse, Gripe, Grumble, Growl, and Complain.

@ Drake1

If you have both 4th Generation and 5th Generation they will cut it.


I wouldn’t congratulate LM & F-35 PM. I’ll give them a destroyed turkey JSF back to them in a torn documents etc.

The problem most people have is that you are thinking about “current” needs now. LM and the Pentagon are looking at the threat enviornment out to 2025 to 2050! Other countries aren’t waiting around so we can’t either.

It’s like saying the F-15 wasn’t needed because the F-4 was working just fine. Meanwhile Russia was testing Su-27’s. Do you people know what Russia (and China) are doing now? Are you all really that short sighted? Really?

And why can’t a combat ready F-35B be available for under $200 million? This isn’t a strategic bomber built in the dozens we’re talking about, presuming a production run of several hundred F-35Bs, there’s a lot of opportunity to streamline the production methods and logistics involved.

The STOVL engine configuration is naturally complicated, but the system the Harrier uses isn’t exactly what one would call “simple” either.

In terms of stealth materials, we’ve come a long way since the coatings used on the F-117A and even the B-2A. The most costly components are likely to be the avionics suite, but trying to jam that into any other fighter isn’t going make those cheaper.

Short sighted? Yep. Listen to the people who think we should stick with variants of current designs (F-15, F-16, F/A-18) and they’ll tell you UCAVs are going to appear and magically make everything better. They won’t even require development and testing apparently…

Not an apples-to-apples cost comparision. Apples-to-apples LRIP4 F-35As are less expensive than the last MYP F-22s.

LRIP 5 cost went up because the contract was cut from 42 to 30 aircraft.

The F-35 System Development and Demonstration fleet surpassed 2,000 total flight hours 18 October 2011.

For CY2012 through 3 March 2012, the F-35 test program had completed 161 flights totaling more than 250 flight hours and had accrued more than 1,100 test points.

Not apples-to-apples numbers.

FY2103 budget numbers
$ million
F-35A Rec Fly = 118,144 [19]
F-35A Net P-1 = 164,437 [19]
F-35B Rec Fly = 156,799 [6]
F-35B Net P-1 = 234,123 [6]
F-35C Rec Fly = 142,637 [4]
F-35C Net P-1 = 251,908 [4]
F/A-18E/F Rec Fly = 54,362 [26]
F/A-18E/F Net P-1 = 78,274 [26]

AND while the F/A-18E/F cost have remain more-or-less steady for a decade, the cost of the F-35 have already been cut about in half & are projected to be cut about in half AGAIN during full rate production.

The USAF, USMC, USN, eight foreign program partners, Israel & Japan HAVE seen a compelling argument for the vital military necessity of the F-35…

What ‘serious issues’ still need to be addressed?

Pcfem, if this is the cut in half price then it would have been over $400 million at one point and it’s been made pretty clear that the JSF just topped $200 million for the first time and is still going up. You used to be good at lying and posting false information to defend the F-35. Now you just suck at it. What happened?

Pcfem, if this is the cut in half price then it would have been $400 million at one point and it’s been made pretty clear that the F-35 only recenlty just topped $200 million. You used to be at least creative in making lies and false information to defend the F-35. Now you’re just getting lazy. What happened?

The JSF cant face existing Soviet and Chinese fighters — what make you think it will have any chance against future ones ?

>What ‘serious issues’ still need to be addressed? — pfcem

Does it get anymore clueless than a F-35 shill LOL ?

Canada having second thoughts on getting the F-35 http://​www​.defencetalk​.com/​c​a​n​a​d​a​-​m​a​y​-​b​a​c​k​-​o​u​t​-of

Just the first of many more to come.

Yeah considering our extreme air superiority over the entire world, I’d say this plane is pretty useless.

Oh yeah it’s also a majorly expensive boondoggle.

Because if we just worry about the enemies we know about, the ones we don’t know about will attack. These aircraft are meant to counter the “near peers”. e.g. China, Russia, and India, or any Nato country that wants to step out of line.

Would it be more PC to call it a penispit?

Hmm…250 hrs/161 flts = approx 1.55 hrs/flt. IOW , around 93 minutes average flight. Wow.

And as for these ‘test points’ — what exactly is a test point, and how significant must an event be to qualify as a test point?

“The canopy of AF-11 was found to be still effectively transparent after the18th flight, that’s another test point successfully met!”

Yes YOU are clueless.

Great thinking there. Yep, lets just wait for the rest of the world to pass us by and lose that air superiority!



NOTE: Comments are limited to 2500 characters and spaces.

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement

AdChoices | Like us on , follow us on and join us on Google+
© 2015 Military Advantage
A Monster Company.