Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning and F-22 'Raptor' : News & Discussion

[randomradio]

Before the upgrades of block 4 it is necessary to integrate TR3 and its software with block 3F because at the moment they have flown the F-35 with partial software, which is not enough for the plane to be able to fight and the block 4 is too far away to wait for it.

Upgraded F-35s fly with partial software as DOD hunts for delivery fix

The first TR-3 F-35's initial checkout flight comes as the Joint Program Office hunts for a way to accelerate deliveries, perhaps using interim software.

www.defensenews.com

We already knew that to run Block 4 of the F-35 correctly, you needed Tech Refresh 3 or TR3. We know that TR3 includes software and hardware upgrades to improve displays, memory and computer processing power, we also know that this development increases power consumption and the need for cooling.

Unfortunately the F-35 is a little short on electrical generation and cooling, which means that we are already above the initial specifications, particularly for cooling where the thermal management system takes more air than expected, which means operating the engine at excessive temperature which will wear it out prematurely. For electrical generation it is not much better since we learn that we cannot operate all the systems at the same time due to its weakness.

It must be understood that the problem is due to a bad design, itself due to a bad specification, because in order of magnitude an electric generation of a fighter is peanuts in energy compared to what is available for the propulsion. That is to say that if it was well designed the thrust would be a little weaker but so insignificant that we would not even feel it in the performance.

So they say to themselves that if we improve the performance of the reactor by changing its core (it's easy because since the development of the F-35 has dragged on, there has been technological progress in this area) and if we make a new thermal management system to a good specification we should be able to solve the problem.

But for these modifications to be fully exploited, it is necessary to improve the electrical generation, that is to say take more energy, which leads to a new gearbox, and a replacement of the electrical generator which will be part of an overall modification of the electrical power system.

Likewise, the evolution of the thermal management system (the one which draws air from the engine) will be accompanied by an evolution of the fuel thermal management system.

So the modification is:

• Software upgrade
• Screens
• Memoirs
• Processors
• Reactor Core
• Gearbox
• Electric generation
• Thermal management system
• Thermal Fuel Management System

Well, it seems that it is not cheap, according to the pifometer we are in the order of magnitude of the price of the Rafale program.

Oh yes, it will be necessary to retrofit approximately 1000 F-35s.

The TR-3 seems to be ahead of its expected 2024 schedule, so that's good news for the program.

As for electrical requirements, they have an upgrade plan, so let's see how that goes. Most of the delivered F-35s don't need this upgrade though, they will just relegate it for training or secondary missions. The USAF has taken deliveries of only some 300-odd jets. The remaining 1400+ are the ones that count.

Also, only the USAF counts, all other export customers save for Israel have to depend on them for the most difficult missions, and their jet will be the most suited for such missions. All the others will just play second fiddle. And the USAF's plan is to use 300 F-35As and 200 NGADs for such missions, so none of the delivered ones count. It's very likely these 300 F-35As will be far more advanced than all the other ones, maybe the only ones with NGAD's engine for example or at least Growth Option 2.0. So Block 4's important from that perspective.

Rafale's in the same position, only post F3R gets full F5 capabilities, the rest end up doing the other 70-80% missions.

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

The TR-3 seems to be ahead of its expected 2024 schedule, so that's good news for the program.

As for electrical requirements, they have an upgrade plan, so let's see how that goes. Most of the delivered F-35s don't need this upgrade though, they will just relegate it for training or secondary missions. The USAF has taken deliveries of only some 300-odd jets. The remaining 1400+ are the ones that count.

Also, only the USAF counts, all other export customers save for Israel have to depend on them for the most difficult missions, and their jet will be the most suited for such missions. All the others will just play second fiddle. And the USAF's plan is to use 300 F-35As and 200 NGADs for such missions, so none of the delivered ones count. It's very likely these 300 F-35As will be far more advanced than all the other ones, maybe the only ones with NGAD's engine for example or at least Growth Option 2.0. So Block 4's important from that perspective.

Rafale's in the same position, only post F3R gets full F5 capabilities, the rest end up doing the other 70-80% missions.

For me, the TR-3 is not ahead of schedule, it is late and this leads to actions to limit collateral damage, mainly the cessation of receipts of the F-35 produced. As it is the software that is the problem, they created a new partial version (therefore simplified and easier to develop) of this software so that the planes can resume flights as quickly as possible. This does not prejudge the date on which TR3 will be able to fly with Blk 3F (to complete receipt of the aircraft) and even less of the date on which it will fly with partial or complete Blk 4.

And the Rafale is not at all in the same psychodrama, for example I am sure that all your Rafales will be able to upgrade to F5, only the Rafales produced for France before we export to Egypt and the 5 or 6 Egyptian Rafales which were originally planned for France will not be able to do so, but they will still be able to evolve towards standards very close to the complete F5: for example for the radar they may not be able to put side antennas but they will still be able to put a main GaN antenna.

 

[Optimist]

The pending stuff is all American though.

You didn't read it, did you.

"However, the partners have been collaborating on F-35 software evaluation together for months already."

 

[randomradio]

For me, the TR-3 is not ahead of schedule, it is late and this leads to actions to limit collateral damage, mainly the cessation of receipts of the F-35 produced. As it is the software that is the problem, they created a new partial version (therefore simplified and easier to develop) of this software so that the planes can resume flights as quickly as possible. This does not prejudge the date on which TR3 will be able to fly with Blk 3F (to complete receipt of the aircraft) and even less of the date on which it will fly with partial or complete Blk 4.

And the Rafale is not at all in the same psychodrama, for example I am sure that all your Rafales will be able to upgrade to F5, only the Rafales produced for France before we export to Egypt and the 5 or 6 Egyptian Rafales which were originally planned for France will not be able to do so, but they will still be able to evolve towards standards very close to the complete F5: for example for the radar they may not be able to put side antennas but they will still be able to put a main GaN antenna.

Once the hardware's in, things will get moving much faster though. The partial software release is only for the Pentagon's sake. If they didn't plan to make this partial software originally, then it's got no relation to the actual development process, the jet was very likely ready for delivery back in July itself. Growth Option 1.0 should also take care of some of the issues when the engines go in for overhaul.

Rafale is not in the same position, of course. It's an MLU problem after all. I'm just pointing out that not all jets need to be at the highest level. So the USAF is dealing with the same problem as France is with pre-F3R jets. But it's worse for France because majority of their jets cannot be upgraded to F5, whereas the USAF will take majority deliveries of F-35s with all the F5-equivalent upgrades.

 

[randomradio]

You didn't read it, did you.

"However, the partners have been collaborating on F-35 software evaluation together for months already."

That's in reference to partner-specific B4 upgrades, it was always planned, like Meteor, JSM and ASRAAM integration. Not the primary development of the aircraft itself, like radar, engine, flight controls, stealth, EW suite, comlink etc. The jet is facing issues with primary systems.

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

Once the hardware's in, things will get moving much faster though. The partial software release is only for the Pentagon's sake. If they didn't plan to make this partial software originally, then it's got no relation to the actual development process, the jet was very likely ready for delivery back in July itself. Growth Option 1.0 should also take care of some of the issues when the engines go in for overhaul.

Rafale is not in the same position, of course. It's an MLU problem after all. I'm just pointing out that not all jets need to be at the highest level. So the USAF is dealing with the same problem as France is with pre-F3R jets. But it's worse for France because majority of their jets cannot be upgraded to F5, whereas the USAF will take majority deliveries of F-35s with all the F5-equivalent upgrades.

Hardware-wise the F-35 was probably ready last July, but there was no way to verify it. We had the same situation for the installation of TR2: Block 2B worked on TR1 and they decided to port it to TR2 to create a version that they called 3I from which they would make the evolutions to arrive at 3F. The expected time to move from 2B to 3I was measured in weeks and the time it took to do so was over a year. When we turned on the Radar with 3I the software crashed completely.

The problem now is that instead of having 3F only and making a 4I version and developing block 4 from 4I we have a 3F version from which we have already developed subsets of block 4 and there is no 4I version planned. What should you port and when? Because 3F and partial versions of 4 are much more complex than 2B and therefore much more difficult to port. This is why, to resume flights, they created a very simple version that they were able to port, but this version probably does not have mission capability, it just allows you to fly. So I think it will take a long time before an F-35 flies with a partial Blk 4 version on TR3 and for the full Block 4 it will be necessary to update the engine which will only be available in 2029 according to the official schedule.

For the transition from Rafale to F5, this only concerns the 152 Rafale produced for France, the new export Rafale are not affected and as we sold 24 used ones to countries which do not need F5, we will have 128 Rafale in F4.3 and above, and 97 Rafale capable of upgrading to F5, until we replace the oldest Rafale from 2034 - 36. It's not a disaster!

For the F-35 there are perhaps only 300 that have been produced for the USAF today and I think it's more like 400 but in 2029 when everything has been developed we will have more than 1000 and only then can we retrofit

 

[randomradio]

Hardware-wise the F-35 was probably ready last July, but there was no way to verify it. We had the same situation for the installation of TR2: Block 2B worked on TR1 and they decided to port it to TR2 to create a version that they called 3I from which they would make the evolutions to arrive at 3F. The expected time to move from 2B to 3I was measured in weeks and the time it took to do so was over a year. When we turned on the Radar with 3I the software crashed completely.

The problem now is that instead of having 3F only and making a 4I version and developing block 4 from 4I we have a 3F version from which we have already developed subsets of block 4 and there is no 4I version planned. What should you port and when? Because 3F and partial versions of 4 are much more complex than 2B and therefore much more difficult to port. This is why, to resume flights, they created a very simple version that they were able to port, but this version probably does not have mission capability, it just allows you to fly. So I think it will take a long time before an F-35 flies with a partial Blk 4 version on TR3 and for the full Block 4 it will be necessary to update the engine which will only be available in 2029 according to the official schedule.

I don't think the Pentagon will accept operational fighters without any mission capability. And IIRC, the previous decade they split B4 into A and B. And A is now aimed to complete in 2026, if at all.

And it has taken first steps towards FRP.

F-35 program completes key combat simulations, could pave way for full-rate production - Breaking Defense

While over 900 F-35s have been produced, the program has technically been stuck in its initial operational testing phase for years over the delayed completion of the trials.

breakingdefense.com

FRP certification will signal the completion of minimal capabilities, particularly the 3F.

For the transition from Rafale to F5, this only concerns the 152 Rafale produced for France, the new export Rafale are not affected and as we sold 24 used ones to countries which do not need F5, we will have 128 Rafale in F4.3 and above, and 97 Rafale capable of upgrading to F5, until we replace the oldest Rafale from 2034 - 36. It's not a disaster!

Export jets for both are irrelevant, except for India, 'cause only US, France and India on the Western side require high end capabilities for a peer war against Russia and China. In fact, you could say a lot of capabilities the USAF has access to on the F-35 will be locked for other countries. So you fight Russia, we fight China, the US fights both and everybody else prays. That's how it's gonna be in the F-35/Rafale era.

So whether it's a disaster or not depends on how you look at it. If we consider early build F-35As, say 200 jets, versus 152 Rafale F4, and assume that these jets will be largely irrelevant from 2034 onwards relative to adversary capabilities. And if we assume both US and France will replace these jets 1-to-1 with newer jets, B5, F6 etc, then it will just take 2.5 years for the USAF but 14-15 years for France.

And you have to wonder that if by 2035 the USAF has those 300 advanced F-35As and 200 NGADs, the Russians will work to counter those. So the question France should be asking is if those 97 F5s will be enough instead of 225 F5s. So, even after screwing up the F-35, the USAF will still be in a better position than France in 2035. Of course, if the USAF conducts more than 90% of the primary missions against Russia, then 97 is enough.

For the F-35 there are perhaps only 300 that have been produced for the USAF today and I think it's more like 400 but in 2029 when everything has been developed we will have more than 1000 and only then can we retrofit

Only the initial lot cannot be upgraded though, quite a few of the 300 can be upgraded. I don't know from which Lot, but they have been making B4 ready jets. B4 like Rafale F4 is primarily a software program. The only question is when P&W will deliver engine upgrades and if older jets will get the upgrades soon or not.

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

In a January 2023 article:

So far, it said, 540 F-35s have been produced for the U.S. military, and Lockheed Martin said it has delivered more than 890 of the fighters worldwide.

Grazier said the F-35 program has continued producing new fighters as if it were already in full-rate production.

But if problems are found in the testing needed before the full-rate production decision, he said, hundreds of already-built and in-use fighters may need to undergo retrofitting.

“The problem is, we’re pushing underdeveloped F-35s onto operational units,” Grazier said. “This is a really horrible precedent for future acquisition programs. Federal acquisition law was written for a reason.”

DoD delays key F-35 tests, lowering chance of 2023 production decision

“They spent years trying to develop a simulator to test [the F-35], and they still can’t deliver that," POGO's Dan Grazier said.

www.defensenews.com

everyone reasons as if the operational tests were not going to find any anomalies: but it is the most complex tests which discover the most twisted and difficult anomalies to correct, and given the technical debt already accumulated I am not optimistic about the results of these tests.

 

[Optimist]

You both are living a retarded life. Do you think it would be a sin to google?
Try this for a start
Google: f-35 finishes Joint Simulation Environment testing

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

f-35 finishes Joint Simulation Environment testing

Yes and so? The results of these tests are not known, and this is worrying because if they were good Lockheed would boast about the obvious superiority of the F-35.

 

[randomradio]

In a January 2023 article:

DoD delays key F-35 tests, lowering chance of 2023 production decision

“They spent years trying to develop a simulator to test [the F-35], and they still can’t deliver that," POGO's Dan Grazier said.

www.defensenews.com

everyone reasons as if the operational tests were not going to find any anomalies: but it is the most complex tests which discover the most twisted and difficult anomalies to correct, and given the technical debt already accumulated I am not optimistic about the results of these tests.

An FRP announcement will put the speculations to rest.

 

[randomradio]

You both are living a retarded life. Do you think it would be a sin to google?
Try this for a start
Google: f-35 finishes Joint Simulation Environment testing

You must emulate Gandhi's three monkeys 'cause the link I posted mentions exactly that. The problem is we are yet to see real world progress post the simulations.

And that requires full TR-3 hardware integration.

I'm arguing that we are close to it, while Picdel says it could be delayed further than planned. And this also depends on how many of those JSE tests were actually successful, and this would require clearing internal review first.

For completion of the objectives set in the 2000s, the F-35 must first get the TR-3 hardware, then start full rate production, ie, it would mean it's finally Block 3F compliant. Then we will see the gradual release of an initial B4 by 2026 followed by the final release in 2029. In the meantime, they need to figure out what they are gonna do about the insufficient electrical power and thrust, gonna cost moolah.

PS: All the cool goodies LM keeps touting are in B4. B3F is very basic, almost the entire EW capabilities are part of B4. The pilots fly with only limited capabilities while training on B4 via simulators, that's not gonna win any wars. And you can bet there are gonna be more setbacks during development. Considering you are Australian, you should be very concerned about going to war with China with an incomplete aircraft.

Have you even considered that your country is going to be fighting a major peer war in less than 4 years?

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

You must emulate Gandhi's three monkeys 'cause the link I posted mentions exactly that. The problem is we are yet to see real world progress post the simulations.

And that requires full TR-3 hardware integration.

I'm arguing that we are close to it, while Picdel says it could be delayed further than planned. And this also depends on how many of those JSE tests were actually successful, and this would require clearing internal review first.

For completion of the objectives set in the 2000s, the F-35 must first get the TR-3 hardware, then start full rate production, ie, it would mean it's finally Block 3F compliant. Then we will see the gradual release of an initial B4 by 2026 followed by the final release in 2029. In the meantime, they need to figure out what they are gonna do about the insufficient electrical power and thrust, gonna cost moolah.

PS: All the cool goodies LM keeps touting are in B4. B3F is very basic, almost the entire EW capabilities are part of B4. The pilots fly with only limited capabilities while training on B4 via simulators, that's not gonna win any wars. And you can bet there are gonna be more setbacks during development. Considering you are Australian, you should be very concerned about going to war with China with an incomplete aircraft.

Have you even considered that your country is going to be fighting a major peer war in less than 4 years?

My concern is that these tests may not only uncover new anomalies, but also reclassify certain category 2 anomalies as category 1. Because let's not forget that over a hundred category 1 anomalies have been requalified as category 2 by civil servants, even though this is a test pilot's prerogative.

 

[Optimist]

Yes and so? The results of these tests are not known, and this is worrying because if they were good Lockheed would boast about the obvious superiority of the F-35.

silly boy, no one else can say anything official..it is DOT&E that releases this info in a public report. No one will steal their thunder. Early 2024 is said.

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

You both are living a retarded life. Do you think it would be a sin to google?
Try this for a start
Google: f-35 finishes Joint Simulation Environment testing

Well with @randomradio we're discussing the possible results of these tests and it's a pretty balanced discussion unlike your reaction which shows your lack of understanding of the situation.

 

[randomradio]

My concern is that these tests may not only uncover new anomalies, but also reclassify certain category 2 anomalies as category 1. Because let's not forget that over a hundred category 1 anomalies have been requalified as category 2 by civil servants, even though this is a test pilot's prerogative.

DOT&E is gonna take it through a wringer. Worst case, the entire program fails and they have to go back to the drawing board, like we did with LCA.

 

[randomradio]

silly boy, no one else can say anything official..it is DOT&E that releases this info in a public report. No one will steal their thunder. Early 2024 is said.

Gotta keep it simple for you. FRP or bust. Of course, it depends on the trade-offs made to get it to FRP, with a promise of fixing the remaining issues in later production lots.

Did you know the original date for FRP was 2013?

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

Gotta keep it simple for you. FRP or bust. Of course, it depends on the trade-offs made to get it to FRP, with a promise of fixing the remaining issues in later production lots.

Did you know the original date for FRP was 2013?

Initial F-35 schedule

 

[Optimist]

Did you know the original date for FRP was 2013?

Did you know the F-35 had completed SDD and finished its physical testing for FRP, in 2018? It's a computer sim that held it up longer

Just a quick quiz.... if they can build 156 a year now and 156 a year FRP. What is the advantage to US and non-US buyers with FRP?

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

Did you know the F-35 had completed SDD and finished its physical testing for FRP, in 2018? It's a computer sim that held it up longer

Just a quick quiz.... if they can build 156 a year now and 156 a year FRP. What is the advantage to US and non-US buyers with FRP?

The advantage of IOT&E tests is that they are conducted by a third party and are not subject to manufacturer bias. They therefore enable a more complete set of anomaly corrections to be specified and avoid having to pay a fortune in retrofits on production aircraft.
Yes, because the FRP is not declared when the tests are finished but when the anomalies found during the tests have been corrected.