Welsh Warns of ‘Alarmist’ Reaction to F-35 Fire

Welsh Warns of ‘Alarmist’ Reaction to F-35 Fire

The U.S. Air Force’s top officer cautioned against an “alarmist” reaction to last month’s F-35 engine fire that resulted in a temporary fleet-wide grounding of the fighter jet and delay of its international debut.

The Pentagon’s entire fleet of about 100 fifth-generation fighters made by Lockheed Martin Corp. was grounded for weeks following a June 23 engine fire aboard an Air Force F-35A model at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida. The aircraft subsequently missed its first planned appearances in the United Kingdom, including the Farnborough International Air Show outside London.

The fire was traced to excessive rubbing of fan blades in a section of the Pratt & Whitney-made F135 engine known as the integrally bladed rotor. While subsequent inspections revealed similar rubbing in several other engines, the phenomenon was far milder than in the engine that caught fire, leading Pentagon officials to conclude the problem wasn’t systemic.


“It would be a little alarmist to assume we have a problem with the F-35 engine,” Air Force Gen. Mark Welsh said during a news conference on Wednesday at the Pentagon. “Pratt and Whitney’s been making pretty darn good engines for single-engine airplanes for a long time.”

He added, “What we found in the program so far with these almost 9,000 sorties now is this engine works pretty well, too. That day it didn’t, and we have to figure out why.”

The general dodged a question on whether the Pentagon should have continued development of an alternative engine, the F136, made by General Electric Co. and Rolls-Royce Plc. “I’d like to have 1,763 F-35s, with an engine that works really well every single day,” he said in response to the question, referring to the service’s planned acquisition quantity. “That’s the goal.”

Welsh appeared at the briefing alongside Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James, who said she expects the flight restrictions on the F-35 to ease up as investigators identify exactly what caused the engine fire.

“It’s not unusual in a development program to have something like this happen,” she said. “It’s happened before. I think we’re all very optimistic that we will be working through it. So I do not believe … that this is in any way a show-stopper. It was unfortunate that it happened, but we’re going through and trying to narrow down a root cause.”

The Joint Strike Fighter is the Pentagon’s most expensive acquisition program, estimated to cost nearly $400 billion for 2,443 aircraft. Keeping the planes flying over the next half-century may cost another $1 trillion in sustainment.

Eight countries have committed to help develop the F-35, including the U.K., Italy, the Netherlands, Turkey, Canada, Australia, Denmark and Norway. Also, Israel, Japan and South Korea plan to buy production models of the aircraft.

Tags: , , ,

Join the Conversation

Not to worry… A 3.2 G maneuvering limit is more than enough now that we’ve been assured that “maneuverability is irrelevant”, right?

“‘It’s not unusual in a development program to have something like this happen,’ she said.”

The powers that be keep telling us on the one hand that the jet is nearly ready to go to war. As a reliable, available instrument of force projection.

Then when something like this happens — a dangerous, costly Class A mishap which will probably result in the burnt airframe being written off — and that merely from taxiing out for takeoff — the powers that be promptly say, “Oh, it’s still in _development_, silly, you can’t expect stability or maturity from the platform yet.”

Which is it? Ready, or unready?

What she (SecAF James) forgot to recognize was that the engine was certified/qualified over three years ago and since that time it has been in production. This was not a development engine issue but rather a fielded production engine issue. And as for an “isolated incident” they are all isolated events until they happens again.

mschust, this was a training A/C, not a development flight test airplane.

During F 22 testing didn’t one of the prototypes crash? Could you imagine what people would be saying if an F 35 crashed during testing.

Clearly this was one more opportunity for Lockheed and Pratt to make money. Notice the timing, right before a big air show. If it wouldn’t have been an engine fire, it would have been something else. Do you really think Lockheed doesn’t realize that the more problems they have during development, the more money they make? Who signs a “for profit” company up to a contract like that? Morons, that’s who. Total f’ing morons.

Dfens, Don’t follow your logic. This setback did anything but help LM/PW’s case for international sales. Yes it might cost DoD some a additional bucks to get this bullet train back on track but the cancelled debut probably will translate into partner/foreign customers delaying their orders to ensure this is behind the LM/PW team.

It is clear that they are trying to reassure the public and potential customers the best they can.

Honestly I find it hard to believe it is an isolated event. How often does an engine litteraly blow up like that?

Frankly, even if the F-35 is needed and should be ramped up, it is a scary problem.

The question is, statistically, how long will it take before the next similar incident occurs? The number of F-35s is increasing, so maybe what, one year or two years? Hard to tell.

This being said let’s hope of course that it was an isolated event.

I worry more about Welsh’s alarmist reactions to USAF force structure.

oh don’t worry Gen Sir Walsh, that little flame coming out of the back end of F-35 is only a mere flesh wound

you’ll keep saying
“tis but a scratch“
and
“I’ve had worse“
just keep on saying
“I’m invincible” (in the F-35) and it’ll be so

and there’s no need to worry about killer rabbits either (Russians and Chinese) they are just tiny little furry animals, completely harmless

Did anyone read the Bloomberg article about the Major Software delay for the “Junk Strike Fighter” http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014–07-29/software

The F135 was certified/qualified but that doesn’t mean everything remains the same as the production rate is geared up. This engine wasn’t necessarily built with components from all of the same suppliers or with the same tooling as used by other F135s. Some minor changes to components may have been implemented based on experience from F-35 operations but that doesn’t seem to have been a factor here.

For whatever reasons some part of some component wasn’t quite within tolerances and made it past QA. So the F-35 program gets it, puts it in an aircraft, and it worked at first but it wears faster and soon enough it leads to a mishap, in this case a very bad fire that thankfully occurred on the ground.

Not to excuse events like this but similar mishaps occur even with proven designs that have been in service for decades. It’s just part of manufacturing.

“Did anyone read the Bloomberg article about the Major Software delay”

Completely predictable, and in fact publicly predicted, as anyone will learn who goes back through the archives to read what I had said many moons ago.

Next year will mark the fortieth anniversary of publication of _The Mythical Man-Month_ by Fred Brooks, and abjectly incompetent program managers such as those on the F-35 still ignore everything about software which Brooks taught.

“Adding manpower to a late software project makes it later,” Brooks said, drawing on a deep well of expertise in the field and a stack of case studies two stories high. That rule has been repeatedly reconfirmed and amplified ever since.

So what did LockMart and the JSF JPO do when it became clear they were horribly far behind schedule on the software? They piled in a whole bunch of newly hired software engineers to “hurry up” the work, and now it has blown up in their faces yet again.

Failed program. Time to stop throwing good money after bad.

Well, you said it yourself. You said that the powers that be said that it was NEARLY ready. NEARLY ready, isn’t ready, IS IT? Soooo, I guess that it’s not ready, according to your own way of putting it. So, the reality is, at any time a surprise can creep up, slowing down an otherwise excellent program, causing the engineers and designers to investigate what happened and fix it and put the program back on track again.
The Airbus A380 was ready and in commercial service for a good time until one of the Rolls Royce Trent 900 engines on one plane blew up causing the return to the airport. Almost the whole fleet was grounded until they found out what happened. Did this mean the plane wasn’t ready, even though it had already been making money for a good while by then? No, it doesn’t mean that it wasn’t ready. What it is, we are an imperfect people, living in an imperfect world creating imperfect goods that sooner or later MAY display a need for improvement. That’s what it means.

LOL Can you imagine Airbus saying well — the A380 is NEARLY ready. They’d be sued into the ground.

The F-35 isnt ready and is already obsolete. It will never be ready for combat.

Every F-35 is going to be be a different mix of patches and fixes. The whole idea of commonality s a joke — no two F-35 are the same.

If you look at the software development of the F-35 the only conclusion you can draw is that poor execution was planned. The F-35 team chose the worst quality control choice at every turn, you would get better decisions by rolling dice or asking people on the street what to do.

Its almost as if Lockheed makes money from fixing each fault.

The F136 is gone, but there is another engine that would be a VERY good fit for the F35. I will just leave it at that.

From what I remember the F-14 had some significant engine issues well into its service life. The F-15 also had some engine issues and very few would consider these aircraft as failures.

Mark Welsh needs to BE FIRED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

JSF is Worthless… everyone at the Pentagon knows it is worthless. The Marines need their version. However, the Navy would rather drink bleach water that accept a platform that has no capability, no internal gun and a complete waste of Naval Aviation Funding. No one has the integrity to say it is Worthless, and the program needs to be STOPPED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Lockheed Martin and General Welsh has taken every Taxpayer in the country since 1995 when the JSF first started and STOP this mess… 160–350 Million a piece is way to much and there is too many issues with the Software, Hardware, Weapons System, Engine, Avionics, Weapons Bay.. after 20 plus years of development I suppose we should not expect much.…

When reading you JRL, one thing is sure : you never flew a combat jet !
That G limit is looking you as a baby seal.

Lockheed is making money off of development. They don’t give a f if they sell a single airplane. What they’d really like is for the JSF program to be cancelled now so they can start bidding on the next great airplane program. Designing airplanes is cheap and easy. Building them is tough. Building airplanes that actually fly and do that airplane shit is even tougher. And Lockheed makes the same 10% profit if they are designing airplanes or building them.

Hold on, Lockheed actually does make money from fixing each fault. Doh, who would have seen that coming? So let’s cancel the program now, because maybe the next time we contract Lockheed or Boeing to build us a new fighter jet, they won’t notice they get paid more to f up. But if they do, we’ll cancel that program and start another and another and another, each time writing the same kind of contract and each time expecting a better result, because that’s exactly the kind of behavior you’d expect from a bunch of people stupid enough to let their government sign them up to a contract with a “for profit” company that allows that company to spend themselves rich with their tax dollars.

but they had two engines!

The F-15 was designed under a different kind of contract. That contract reimbursed MD for their development costs, but didn’t provide them with any profit margin until they delivered “working” airplanes to the Air Force. In those days the pressure on the engineers to cut corners during the design process was intense. It didn’t matter if the parts you designed were inadequate to do the job, you met schedule or they found someone who would, and testing was out of the question. As a result, the “A” and often even the “B” model of most airplanes produced under that kind of contract were death traps.

We care a lot more about safety these days because under today’s contract if a pilot is killed by their airplane the company that designed it gets a huge contract to fix that airplane, and makes a profit off of every dime they spend doing so. In fact, because we claim to care so much more about pilots these days we usually let the contractor over run these contracts to fix the airplane they should have designed correctly the first time. We allow the contractor to significantly over run those contracts and we make sure they make a profit on everything they spend. But we don’t call it allowing the contractor to spend themselves rich, even though it’s pretty clear that’s what’s going on.

The only thing worse than the F35 is the lack of a plan to replace the AV-8B, F-15/16/18, Tornado, etc. The B-52 had problems, went over budget. The F-16 had problems, went over budget. B-1, F-22, B-2, F-117…all had problems, went over budget. …and that’s just the airplanes. Army and Navy have similar issues…Bradley, LCS, Stryker, CVX, etc. Not good, just reality.

When reading you Cougar, one thing is sure : you aren’t that quick on picking up on obvious sarcasm !

By starting the assembly line early Lockheed is able to work out the kinks in the system during the development phase of the program, which is usually the most profitable phase. That way if they do have to build airplanes, they don’t go through that rough spot where their profit level dips substantially as they get the assembly line up and running. If it costs the taxpayer a little more, who really gives a damn?

Can you imagine how much longer it would have taken to develop the A380 if Airbus had made a profit off of every single day they managed to drag out the design of that monster?

The big difference being that the B-52, F-16, F-117, and B-1 programs didn’t make more profit due to the problems they had, which is exactly why they had so many fewer problems. On the other hand, if you pay a company more to have problems, then you cancel that program and start another under the same kind of contract, what are you really doing?

Dfens, you can keep saying that the development phase is the most profitable all that you want but that does not make it true. Contracting rules on profits place a lot more restrictions on Cost Plus contracts then they do on Fixed Price contracts which come later (production). In actuality, the real money is made in the Operations and Support phases. Take a look at Spares and Repairs contracts if you don;t believe me.

Lockheed got the contract in 1995? Do you have a date on that?

In 1992 the Marine Corps and Air Force agreed to jointly develop the Common Affordable Lightweight Fighter, also known as Advanced Short Takeoff and Vertical Landing (ASTOVL), after Paul Bevilaqua persuaded[5] the Air Force that his team’s concept[6] had potential as an F-22 Raptor complement, stripped of the lift system. Thus in a sense the F-35B begat the F-35A, not the other way around.
http://​en​.wikipedia​.org/​w​i​k​i​/​J​o​i​n​t​_​S​t​r​i​k​e​_​F​i​g​h​ter

Mark Welsh needs to BE FIRED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

JSF is Worthless… everyone at the Pentagon knows it is worthless. The Marines need their version. However, the Navy would rather drink bleach water that accept a platform that has no capability, no internal gun and a complete waste of Naval Aviation Funding. No one has the integrity to say it is Worthless, and the program needs to be STOPPED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Lockheed Martin and General Welsh has taken every Taxpayer in the country since 1995 when the JSF first started and STOP this mess… 160–350 Million a piece is way to much and there is too many issues with the Software, Hardware, Weapons System, Engine, Avionics, Weapons Bay.. after 20 plus years of development I suppose we should not expect much.…

I find it interesting that no one has anything positive to write yet are quick to criticize anyone and everyone on your “opinions”, most of which are based on hearsay, not facts. And to suggest that DoD and LM through in the towel at this stage is ludicrous.

So the $100 hammer is where the big bucks are at? Yeah, I doubt that. I’ve worked the spares part of the business too, and there were lots of good sound bites for the 24 hour news, but little in the way of actual waste there. People can wrap their tiny minds around the concept of the government paying too much for a hammer, but when it comes to billions or trillions being wasted on a development program they are just numbers and no one knows or are willing to educate themselves on what a weapons development program should reasonably cost.

So AF brass wants us to not ground the fleet so we can show it off to foreigners. Yeah when one crashes in front of them that be a real selling point.

Here you GO!!!!!!!!!! JSF Started in 1992!!!!!!!!!!!!! 24 Years is Long Enough!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Welsh needs to be fired. See Info and Link Below

In 1992 the Marine Corps and Air Force agreed to jointly develop the Common Affordable Lightweight Fighter, also known as Advanced Short Takeoff and Vertical Landing (ASTOVL), after Paul Bevilaqua persuaded[5] the Air Force that his team’s concept[6] had potential as an F-22 Raptor complement, stripped of the lift system. Thus in a sense the F-35B begat the F-35A, not the other way around.

http://​en​.wikipedia​.org/​w​i​k​i​/​J​o​i​n​t​_​S​t​r​i​k​e​_​F​i​g​h​ter

“I’d like to have…an engine that works really well every single day…That’s the goal.””

You would LIKE to have that? What, you might settle for less?

I would expect a little stronger evaluation of the health and future of the program here. Maybe with a reference to reliability, confidence factors, availability, something? Something better than an expression of faint hope?

That’s the goal? Would that be the threshold (God let’s hope so) or objective?

We don’t have to do much at all. Once flight restrictions are lifted, the F-35 will start to fall out the sky. Wait and see. One pilot killed by an engine burnout and General Wesh will be sued for millions of dollars and of course congress will cancel the F-35, get the FBI involved and maybe will restart production of the F– since we have no other choice

It is partially lifted right now but the bore inspection after 3 hours continue. While at first the apparance was that there were about to be a bending of flight regulation just to make it for the show. Not sure how it happened but they made what they had to do.

According to the article only the 20 test aircraft had the restriction eased, and I don’t see anything wrong about it. Some part on some engines showing sign of early wear which is being monitored.
http://​www​.airforcetimes​.com/​a​r​t​i​c​l​e​/​2​0​1​4​0​7​2​9​/​NEW

IMHO I feel more alarmist about the f-35 as a whole.

Yea except the F-35 was completely inadequately tested. It even has the ignoble distinction of having its quad redundant flight system fail on the final integration test bed.

When you pour gasoline into the latrine drums and set the shiit on fire there will always be someone downwind saying it smells like victory. Those people will tell you how great the F-35is too. But actually its just burning shiit.

Please somebody enlighten me because I have yet to hear a satisfactory answer as to why we need STOVL type aircraft to operate from a ‘big’ carrier? All the extra engineering to make it stovl surely adds weight, complication/delicacy and compromises full power/speed? As for its ‘stealth’ capabilities, I understand that the new generation of radar systems it will be likely to encounter are capable of ‘seeing’ these types of aircraft anyway. Are we trying to be far too clever by half? Wouldn’t a big, strong, fast relatively simple design have been a more practical, utile option?

Sorry, but that G limit is irrelevant for a combat aircraft ; it is too close from a liner (+2.5).
Yours.

Marine Corps Requirement in order to provide Close Air Support (CAS) to Marine Infantry Units any time, any place, any where, e.g. locations without runways. The STOVL or VSOL AV-8B Harrier must operate from “Roads” and other austere areas. If they are deployed front he CVN to a austere area they can provide real-time support in all mission areas without the necessity of modern facilities.

can this plane even survive turbulence?

In other-words just another bullshit marine impost on America.

The marines need the STOVL F-35 because their greatest fear is that someone in America swill see that they are just replicating all the stuff that the other services do only worse.

So they come up with harebrained ideas that no other service will touch just to be different.

With over 10,000 flight hours I would assume that’s a yes. In fact the pilots were having issues with the helmet display when encountering turbulence. The issue was resolved.

Ever heard of the F-16?

It’s still in testing.

They are mostly flying off assault ships and Cavour sized carriers. The brits have them on the QE but they have switched from Bs to Cs, then back to Bs for cost reasons. You are mistaken about the radar.

I think it would be good sense to have another engine made by General Electric Co. and Rolls-Royce Plc, it just make sense when orders for this aircraft are from all over the world, and some air-forces may prefer another engine, why jeopardize a great aircraft when another engine would make air-forces around the world would be much happier.

General Welch, it is not alarmist to recognize that this program continues to have failures. It is recognition that we have been sold a line of excessive optimism from the beginning. The holy grail of commonality was the cornerstone. First it was that we were going to get three airplanes for the price of one . All right, maybe officially three for the price of two, but there was no discouragement of the three for one concept in promotional media. The performance specs for the air vehicle were written to make the job easier by requiring similar aero/propulsion performance to an F-16 carrying external weapons and fuel. OK, great. “F-16 like” performance is good enough for a bomb truck. It should keep the price tag low. However, the sales brochures sold the jet as a cheap air-to-air weapon too. They said that maneuvering is irrelevant, and the gee whiz electronics would compensate. Helmet displays and Distributed Aperture Systems will magically make two missiles the equivalent of six. Swarms of cheap F-35s will transform allied air forces into invincible air armadas. Challenges from potential enemies would be pointless. Hooray for us!
A dozen years later, how did it work out? There was no advantage to commonality at all. A strong case can be made that there was actually negative leverage achieved, adding cost/risk/schedule instead. The management claims that simulations would replace most of the real testing was a lie. Baseless statements that unknown unknowns would not be encountered were not challenged. Arrogance was apparent in that typical development problems were not expected, and technical setbacks unthinkable. It should have been recognized as a sales pitch by government customers, but they had launch fever, and failed in their fiduciary and technical duties. Many other worthy projects were abandoned in the face of the F-35 financial juggernaut. More and more government organizations signed on. It became too big to fail as foreign and domestic air forces were “all-in”.
So, General, it is not alarmism. It is recognition and understanding that the F-35 was ill conceived, badly managed and resulted in the aviation equivalent of a horse designed by committee, a jet powered camel. You are still all-in, but I am out.

Says someone who works for Lockheed Martin.…

Normally you would suspect that ATF worked for the acquisition PEO, but since General Bogdan and his staff don’t seem to be big fans of LM or this program, that eliminates them from suspicion.

Fire Welsh!!!!

22 Years of development at a cost of $160–334 Million Dollars Each time 2600 platforms is off any development Matrix. All we are doing is funding Lockheed Martin at a tune of 1 Trillion Dollars in sustainment cost. With over 270 Software Engineers working at 4 Software Integration Laboratories in Fort Worth working 24/7 for 20 years is absurd. Stealth is DEAD, Boeing is Selling additional EA-18G’s to the Navy and Australia due to the fact JSF cannot penetrate any IADS access denied environment. JSF must have EW/EA Jamming Support. This Platform and Lockheed Martin needs to be Stopped and put out of business. They have ripped off the American People for over 22 years with nothing to show other than an outdated platform with nothing but Software and Hardware issues from nose to tail. The Senate and DOD need to shut this down and work on other platforms and weapon systems that can do the job, not keep Lockheed Martin in the Money Collection business. The Navy and Air Force version of this PIG will not be in the Fleet now until 2021. That is 27 years after initial development. Only 11 years over schedule and Cost. Enough is Enough…

General Bogdan and his staff are liars… They are on LM side. If this platform fails, they fail. The DOD brought General Bogdan in to “Fix” the issue. He has been blessed as the “Fixer and Chief”. However, I have been in meetings at the JSF/JPO and the General has lied both to the DOD and the Senate on numerous occasions . Unfortunately like to the CIA there is no oversight or integrity provided by the JSF/JPO or the DoD. The JSF acquisition process is being done in a closet so no one will no the true status. After 22 years it is a waste and everyone associated with JSF know this is fact. Just like the CIA and NSA information is being withheld from the American people and Senate. If they were in fact told the truth the Platform would be cancelled tomorrow.

It will be the most over tested airplane the world has ever seen. Lockheed makes money off of every single test, no matter how minor.

Meant to be a reply to Allen.

LOL Everybody is an expert! Actually it’s not uncommon at all. Recently both the Su-35 and PAK-FA caught fire during development. With the former burning to the ground. As a matter of fact it’s not so uncommon to see development aircraft during testing. The F-22 crash at one point! This is a minor issue and only a F-35 Critic would make it into a deal any bigger.….…..

NO IT WAS A DEVLOPMENT AIRCRAFT AND IT WAS FLIGHT CONTROL RELATED.

22 Years of development at a cost of $160–334 Million Dollars Each time 2600 platforms is off any development Matrix. All we are doing is funding Lockheed Martin at a tune of 1 Trillion Dollars in sustainment cost. With over 270 Software Engineers working at 4 Software Integration Laboratories in Fort Worth working 24/7 for 20 years is absurd. Stealth is DEAD, Boeing is Selling additional EA-18G’s to the Navy and Australia due to the fact JSF cannot penetrate any IADS access denied environment. JSF must have EW/EA Jamming Support. This Platform and Lockheed Martin needs to be Stopped and put out of business. They have ripped off the American People for over 22 years with nothing to show other than an outdated platform with nothing but Software and Hardware issues from nose to tail. The Senate and DOD need to shut this down and work on other platforms and weapon systems that can do the job, not keep Lockheed Martin in the Money Collection business. The Navy and Air Force version of this PIG will not be in the Fleet now until 2021. That is 27 years after initial development. Only 11 years over schedule and Cost. Enough is Enough…

Here you GO!!!!!!!!!! JSF Started in 1992!!!!!!!!!!!!! 24 Years is Long Enough!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Welsh needs to be fired. See Info and Link Below

In 1992 the Marine Corps and Air Force agreed to jointly develop the Common Affordable Lightweight Fighter, also known as Advanced Short Takeoff and Vertical Landing (ASTOVL), after Paul Bevilaqua persuaded[5] the Air Force that his team’s concept[6] had potential as an F-22 Raptor complement, stripped of the lift system. Thus in a sense the F-35B begat the F-35A, not the other way around.
http://​en​.wikipedia​.org/​w​i​k​i​/​J​o​i​n​t​_​S​t​r​i​k​e​_​F​i​g​h​ter

Thanks for your opinion. It’s Monday, so I’m sure you’re on your way back to the F-35 job site. Have a safe day.

General Bogdan and his staff are liars… They are on LM side. If this platform fails, they fail. The DOD brought General Bogdan in to “Fix” the issue. He has been blessed as the “Fixer and Chief”. However, I have been in meetings at the JSF/JPO and the General has lied both to the DOD and the Senate on numerous occasions . Unfortunately like to the CIA there is no oversight or integrity provided by the JSF/JPO or the DoD. The JSF acquisition process is being done in a closet so no one will no the true status. After 22 years it is a waste and everyone associated with JSF know this is fact. Just like the CIA and NSA information is being withheld from the American people and Senate. If they were in fact told the truth the Platform would be cancelled tomorrow.

Scott, you beg the question: “How many minor issues equal a major issue?”

Defens, your theories are all wrong. You do not understand procurement contracting and have strange ideas about cause and effect.

Scott’s comment about it being flight control related is referring to the YF-22 prototype crash in 1992, which occurred as the F-22A was in detail design, not the F-35 engine fire.

Again, Defense, you do not understand the contracts. Besides, there are two sides to every contract. The people negotiating on the government side are supposed to know what they are doing. Buyer beware. Of course the supplier is going to try to improve their business side. They negotiate for a year or so. I suggest you investigate that process.

Here you GO!!!!!!!!!! JSF Started in 1992!!!!!!!!!!!!! 24 Years is Long Enough!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Welsh needs to be fired. See Info and Link Below

In 1992 the Marine Corps and Air Force agreed to jointly develop the Common Affordable Lightweight Fighter, also known as Advanced Short Takeoff and Vertical Landing (ASTOVL), after Paul Bevilaqua persuaded[5] the Air Force that his team’s concept[6] had potential as an F-22 Raptor complement, stripped of the lift system. Thus in a sense the F-35B begat the F-35A, not the other way around.
http://​en​.wikipedia​.org/​w​i​k​i​/​J​o​i​n​t​_​S​t​r​i​k​e​_​F​i​g​h​ter

If we had procured the X-35 for serial production we could’ve had Joint Strike Fighters (albeit with reduced range and no internal stores) that much sooner. Of course, there would be clamor for the “perfect” supermegaproduct, which is why we are in development hell every time we start a new weapons procurement program.

Amicus Crud, your theories are all wrong. You do not understand procurement contracting and have strange ideas about cause and effect.

Again, Crud, you do not understand the contracts. Besides, there are two sides to every contract. The people negotiating on the government side are supposed to know what they are doing. Buyer beware. Of course the supplier is going to try to improve their business side. They negotiate for a year or so. I suggest you investigate that process.

I did it for 40 years in the business of engineering jets. I had no power, other than observation. It’s your turn now. There are a lot of rent seekers and deceivers out to maximize their gain. Good luck to you, unless you are one of them.

The cost is enormous for another engine.

Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James, SAIC, another Chicken in the Hen House for Major Integrators. Once again Warfighters have to settle for “NONERS” speculating on Engineering Platforms to speed-up the “Kill-Chain” instead of WARRIORS. The Only War she has seen is on CNN… To Clean up this JSF Mess we need a Warrior in Air Force Leadership or discuss the issues with Marines. The Air Force has enough issues keeping woman safe in their Squadrons. I suppose Orders mean nothing. There are to many Leftover losers from the General McPeak era that believed “Stealth” is the name of the game. Well, he destroyed the Air Force and Now Welsh is destroying the Navy and Marine Corps. I suppose this worthless Platform will eventually IOC. It begin begin development in 1992 and will not OIC until 2021. 28 Years of Developing a worthless Monster that now must have additional EA-18G and NGJ developed and manufactured to penetrate a IADS and prosecute the “Kill Chain” with Hopes of Success. Have to Love it… Not to mention, obsolete Hardware and Software, that now has to all be replaced prior to IOC. Of course following 24 years of development and lose of the F-117 that was retired in 2008 because we know Stealth is Dead. WE are now stuck with a Single Engine “Flame Out” Platform with a 1 Trillion Dollar sustainment Cost, and a ginormous $130–334 Million dollar price tag with no internal OCA/DCA AIr-Air Cannon except on the Air Force Version (Brilliant Thinking for the Navy and Marine Corps, Stealth with a Cannon hanging on the Centerline…LOL…). JSF has less capability than SATCOM and/or SOF with a $1 Million Dollar TACTOM, TLAM and/or Predator to prosecute a target within the “Kill Chain”. What a MESS… Yes, Debbie… why don’t you go back to SAIC and help Lockheed Martin make more money. I am sure you will have a great Job with Lockheed as the other Generals at the Pentagon that worked JSF over the past 22 years have done. I am sure you will be on Generals Row at the Fort Worth Golf Course. You will have a great Job with them once you finish this Tour of Duty and finish this Check in the box on your Bucket List. Warriors are obviously worthless to the DOD. Let JSF Burn.… I am sure Debbie has flown a single engine Aircraft that encountered a “Flame Out” at the Merge… She knows all about that.… I am sure she has the “Bold Face Procedures memorized” Debbie and Welsh need to be Fired.… WHAT a MESS and a Shame to the Tax payer and the Warfighers… IT is all about the money, not the Warfighter…

Not much point having a gun when the aircraft doesn’t have the aero/propulsive performance nor the agility to point it in the right direction let alone keep the cross hairs on the target!

If the “rubbing incident” was due to faulty installation of the engine during maintenance or production, then what happened to AF-27 is likely a one off incident.

If due to problems with the design of the engine mounts or the supporting airframe structure or both which resulted in the fan case distorting under take off thrust and “engaging” with the blades of the third stage IBR, then different story.

Either way, being “alarmed” would be appropriate.

The 747–100 and –200 models had numerous P&W engine problems in addition to other troubles. The aircraft were in service and they were modified or procedures altered to mitigate the troubled areas. The F-15A P&W engines had unexpected problems and limitations, yet were available to shoot down Warsaw Pact attacking aricraft. The British considered the 707’s yaw control to be of low performance until the lower ventral fin was added and the upper fin was altered, yet the aircraft flew in service without those technical features.

The F-14 engines are spaced far apart. One engine fails and the combination yaw/roll effect is huge compared to the F-15. The Navy was never happy with the F-14’s lousy P&W reliability and operational limitations. They got a partial solution with the GE engine upgrade.

Not gone, just put on a shelf in a back room hiding away from greedy politicians. Sad the “better” engine didn’t win out here.

There is nothing to worry about. Lockheed is building a plane that:
1. can be seen by newer radars
2. can not out turn, claim or out rune other fighters
3. is over priced

The JSF Program is unique in the fact LM will owe the USG money if the aircraft does not provide the performance written into the KPP’s. Its affectionately called — power by the hour. So all of you armchair experts are wrong when you throw misinformation out into cyber space about who is making money or…not.

It would have crashed if the fire started while the aircraft was in the air!

*required

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.