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

View attachment 33020
A picture of the alleged zircon that was shot down by either a SAMP/T or Patriot battery earlier this year. @BMD @Rajput Lion

Obviously, a biased source but still - Defense Express UA

I guess take it with a grain of salt since there haven't been any official pics of zircon but it does somewhat match up with the grainy launch photos so it might be legit. I believe that the patriot & aster families can likely intercept these missiles at least. The SM series will absolutely have a positive intercept ratio.

Zircon can slow down to supersonic speeds at lower altitudes, and that can allow interception.

The idea behind speed is to decrease the reaction time of SAM batteries, not completely eliminate it, although that's desirable. This decreases the number of missiles needed for penetration and increases costs for the adversary in terms of interception resources. For example, 5 Zircons could do the job of 8 Oniks. And 3 Patriots may be required to do the job of 2.
 
Maybe you ought to research and learn that current Israeli F-35's, or 90% of them, are F-35A standard and just call them F-35I's. F-35I's (Israeli version) are not superior in any way to current USAF F-35A's. The only real changes are their coms and EW system and their EW system is not superior to the F-35A's Barracuda EW. :rolleyes:

It's simple, really. The F-35A is not yet up to the mark due to the lack of TR-3. So the Israelis will have to depend much more on their specific systems. So, if they end up using theirs to penetrate Iranian air space, then the combat proven standard will apply only to their systems.

In any case, the latest Israeli EW systems are much more advanced than what's on the F-35A. The F-35A doesn't even have the hardware for it, never mind the software and new waveforms. It's the cost of all the delays. The F-35A does not only need TR-3, but also all the new antennas planned for installation along with the new radar, and a new engine to power all of that. So you can make your claim around 2030 or so.
 
The Israeli case is very worrying for the US F-35 sustainability. Roughly speaking, to support 40 F-35s you have to reduce activity by 10% of 950 F-35s, I don't want to do the math, but I think you'd have to tie up 75% of the entire fleet to support 25%.

Here are the details :

"The Israeli fleet of Lockheed Martin-built stealth fighters has achieved a 75% full-mission-capable rate and an 85% mission-capable rate despite a 565% jump in monthly average flight hours over a six-month period, said Maj. Gen. Donald Carpenter, the F-35 JPO’s head of logistics and sustainment."

https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/budget-policy-operations/us-f-35-sustainment-lead-details-israel-fleet-ops-october

To sum up: the Israelis have put in an extra 3,000 hours on their F-35 over a 6-month period, i.e. 18,000 hours.

During the same period, all the F-35s put in 90,000 hours. So all the other F-35s put in 72,000 hours.

It's a simplistic but very crude calculation that makes me think this fighter is a calamity.



In detail, look at LM's Fast Facts:

My previous calculations give an average of 14 flight hours per month per F-35.

We're now at 824,000 hours generated for the entire fleet since the start of the program. At the beginning of October it was 734,000.

So we're up to 90,000 hours generated in 6 months by a mere 990 F-35s.

A 565% increase for 39 F-35s, with an average of 14 hours before that, gives 3,000 hours per month generated by Israeli F-35s as extra activity for GAZA. That's 18,000 hours over 6 months.

(90000 - 18000)/ (990 - 39) / 6 = 12,5



Otherwise, between October 2022 and April 2023, the F-35s flew (651000 -570000) or 81000 hours, with an average of 870 F-35s in the fleet.

The 950 non-Israeli F-35s generated 9,000 fewer hours than the previous year, even though there were 80 more F-35s in the fleet.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: john0496
Your own charts show the price has come down. In every case, except USMC F-35C. That price should be the same as the USN, when they settle down. the F-35B is within target.

1713352787231.png

1713352814689.png
 
LM unable to deliver war capable block4/TR3. F-35 Program has to be reorganised.
WASHINGTON — For years, delays and cost growth on a suite of F-35 upgrades known as Block 4 has vexed the Joint Strike Fighter program. Bowing to those problems, officials today revealed they may have to “reimagine,” or completely restructure, the entire upgrade plan.

While no final decisions about the way forward on Block 4 has been made, the same challenges also led program officials to announce that any F-35 jets delivered for another year will receive only an early version of the Technology Refresh 3 (TR-3) software that will not include full combat capability.

Both pieces of news came from F-35 program lead Air Force Lt. Gen. Mike Schmidt, during today’s testimony in front of the House Armed Services tactical air and land forces subcommittee. In written remarks, Schmidt explained that an independent review last year determined that “numerous Block 4 capabilities will not deliver until the 2030s” — years later than a recent estimate offered by congressional auditors — prompting the program to “reimagine” the Block 4 upgrade altogether.

The newly-envisioned Block 4 would instead focus on delivering “‘must-have” content,” Schmidt wrote, which will include an undefined “subset” of 88 capabilities originally approved as part of the Block 4 plan. “Reimagined Block 4 must consist of ‘what industry can actually deliver’ across the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP),” Schmidt wrote, and will likely consist of traits like enhanced electronic warfare and communications capabilities.

The issue has not been decided, Schmidt wrote, and requires buy-in from all members of the F-35 enterprise. Additionally, Schmidt wrote the F-35 program has established new “capability decision points” (CDP) to ensure certain hardware and software can go out to the fleet, emphasizing that program officials are “confident” in Block 4 deliveries associated with those CDPs.

The F-35 program will lay out the new Block 4 approach in “a combat relevant timeframe with yes a subset of capabilities of the Block 4 program, but those which give us the most bang for the buck,” Schmidt said in response to a question from subcommittee Chairman Rep. Rob Wittman, R-Va.

“And honestly, sir, I’m getting tired of over-promising and under-delivering and I need to change that narrative,” he added.

“I want it to reflect reality. I want them to understand what can you do realistically,” Wittman said of the Block 4 plan in a scrum with reporters after the hearing, pointing to the use of tools like digital design in a “reimagined” approach.

“Black 4 ought to be an experience that can not only get us further in the software design and upgrades for F-35, but it also should inform what we’re doing in digital design and digital twin development” on next-gen fighters, Wittman said.

TR-3 Deliveries​

To harness many Block 4 upgrades, the F-35 needs a set of hardware and software known as Technology Refresh 3 (TR-3). That too has been delayed numerous times as plane maker Lockheed Martin struggles with validating the TR-3 software, prompting the Pentagon to halt deliveries of newly-built jets.

Lockheed has maintained in a most recent revised projection that it expects to start delivering jets outfitted with TR-3 in the third quarter of this year, or sometime between July and September. Today, Schmidt said the earliest those deliveries could commence would likely be in the July timeframe, though an independent review suggested instead that August or September could be more likely.

But there’s a catch — those jets would only be delivered with “truncated” software, or an interim version of TR-3 that does not include all capabilities, including ones critical for combat. It’s a plan officials have discussed for months, and Schmidt confirmed today for the first time that the program’s partners have all agreed on the criteria for the plan. “And if we meet those requirements we will truncate,” he said after the hearing.

Through the new plan, the TR-3 software would be released in two separate drops, with the first being the truncated version, Schmidt wrote. A fully combat-capable software load would then be delivered in a second release that Schmidt said could come over a year later.

Numerous problems have led to the TR-3 delay ranging from lab limitations to optimistic projections, Schmidt highlighted. Specifically, Schmidt said in written remarks that TR-3 suffers from issues with “hardware design maturity,” which “manifests in low manufacturing yields of parts necessary for aircraft production.” Additionally, the hardware problem has also led officials to “us[e] software to overcome hardware design maturity challenges.”

As a result, DoD stopped accepting new F-35s last summer, and the Pentagon has been withholding payments on sequestered planes, Bloomberg has previously reported. Asked whether that arrangement would continue under the truncation plan, Schmidt said “We will negotiate the terms and conditions of the truncation.”

After the hearing, Wittman downplayed the impact of not having the complete software upgrade, saying there is “utility” in delivering fighters without full combat capability. He reasoned that the jets can offer training opportunities and that current TR-2 training jets “can easily be combat coded and upgraded.

“Then they’re gonna have to really squeeze to make sure they can do as much as they can to compress to 12 to 16 months to get them combat capable,” he continued. “And that’s just a normal part of the process. So it’s not unusual to TR-3, it’s a normal part of getting these software upgrades into an aircraft and then go[ing] through testing it and getting it combat coded.”

Wittman’s bigger concern, he said, is just getting the software deliverable in the first place.

“I’m confident once they get this delivered, that the effort of getting it combat-coded is not going to be that difficult. The difficulty is getting the software delivered and performing,” he said.

Citing the company’s quiet period ahead of an earnings call scheduled for April 23, a Lockheed spokesperson said the company could not provide further information for this report.
 
The Israeli case is very worrying for the US F-35 sustainability. Roughly speaking, to support 40 F-35s you have to reduce activity by 10% of 950 F-35s, I don't want to do the math, but I think you'd have to tie up 75% of the entire fleet to support 25%.

Here are the details :

"The Israeli fleet of Lockheed Martin-built stealth fighters has achieved a 75% full-mission-capable rate and an 85% mission-capable rate despite a 565% jump in monthly average flight hours over a six-month period, said Maj. Gen. Donald Carpenter, the F-35 JPO’s head of logistics and sustainment."

https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/budget-policy-operations/us-f-35-sustainment-lead-details-israel-fleet-ops-october

To sum up: the Israelis have put in an extra 3,000 hours on their F-35 over a 6-month period, i.e. 18,000 hours.

During the same period, all the F-35s put in 90,000 hours. So all the other F-35s put in 72,000 hours.

It's a simplistic but very crude calculation that makes me think this fighter is a calamity.



In detail, look at LM's Fast Facts:

My previous calculations give an average of 14 flight hours per month per F-35.

We're now at 824,000 hours generated for the entire fleet since the start of the program. At the beginning of October it was 734,000.

So we're up to 90,000 hours generated in 6 months by a mere 990 F-35s.

A 565% increase for 39 F-35s, with an average of 14 hours before that, gives 3,000 hours per month generated by Israeli F-35s as extra activity for GAZA. That's 18,000 hours over 6 months.

(90000 - 18000)/ (990 - 39) / 6 = 12,5



Otherwise, between October 2022 and April 2023, the F-35s flew (651000 -570000) or 81000 hours, with an average of 870 F-35s in the fleet.

The 950 non-Israeli F-35s generated 9,000 fewer hours than the previous year, even though there were 80 more F-35s in the fleet.

14 hours a month of 168 hours a year seems adequate for a SE jet.
 
RAAF Australia's f-35 activity ambitions in free fall:

12500 hours scheduled between July 2023 and June 2024. The PAES shows that only 10500 will be achieved.

p44

https://www.defence.gov.au/sites/default/files/2024-02/2023-24_Defence_PAES_00_Complete.pdf

Ambitions for the following years were 13500 hours for 25-26 and 27-28 (p68 of this doc https://www.defence.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-05/2023-24_defence_pbs_00_complete.pdf). These are reduced to 12,000 in the PAES 23/24.

Several phenomena need to be taken into account:

- deliveries are stopped for an indefinite period,

- F-35 hours are being reduced to limit the MCO budget,

- MCO capacities are currently limited due to Israeli requirements.

According to this document, there are still 12 F-35s to be delivered: https: //www.defence.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-05/2023-24_defence_pbs_03_appendices.pdf

At the date of publication of the PAES, the RAAF estimated that it could achieve 10500 hours with 60 F-35s, i.e. 14.5 hours and 13.9 hours when all the F-35s have been delivered.

In 2021, the RAAF's ambitions were 14900 hours for 72 F-35s in 2023/24. That's 17.2 hours per F-35 per month.https://www.defence.gov.au/sites/default/files/2022-02/2020-21_Defence_PAES_00_Complete.pdf

So we have a RAAF that has revised its ambitions, by one hour less activity every year thanks to its "maturing understanding of the F-35".
Lots of misunderstanding there Herciv.. One thing you missed. the sustainment cost is US$ 5.3m That's pretty good isn't it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Herciv
LM unable to deliver war capable block4/TR3. F-35 Program has to be reorganised.
WASHINGTON — For years, delays and cost growth on a suite of F-35 upgrades known as Block 4 has vexed the Joint Strike Fighter program. Bowing to those problems, officials today revealed they may have to “reimagine,” or completely restructure, the entire upgrade plan.

While no final decisions about the way forward on Block 4 has been made, the same challenges also led program officials to announce that any F-35 jets delivered for another year will receive only an early version of the Technology Refresh 3 (TR-3) software that will not include full combat capability.

Both pieces of news came from F-35 program lead Air Force Lt. Gen. Mike Schmidt, during today’s testimony in front of the House Armed Services tactical air and land forces subcommittee. In written remarks, Schmidt explained that an independent review last year determined that “numerous Block 4 capabilities will not deliver until the 2030s” — years later than a recent estimate offered by congressional auditors — prompting the program to “reimagine” the Block 4 upgrade altogether.

The newly-envisioned Block 4 would instead focus on delivering “‘must-have” content,” Schmidt wrote, which will include an undefined “subset” of 88 capabilities originally approved as part of the Block 4 plan. “Reimagined Block 4 must consist of ‘what industry can actually deliver’ across the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP),” Schmidt wrote, and will likely consist of traits like enhanced electronic warfare and communications capabilities.

The issue has not been decided, Schmidt wrote, and requires buy-in from all members of the F-35 enterprise. Additionally, Schmidt wrote the F-35 program has established new “capability decision points” (CDP) to ensure certain hardware and software can go out to the fleet, emphasizing that program officials are “confident” in Block 4 deliveries associated with those CDPs.

The F-35 program will lay out the new Block 4 approach in “a combat relevant timeframe with yes a subset of capabilities of the Block 4 program, but those which give us the most bang for the buck,” Schmidt said in response to a question from subcommittee Chairman Rep. Rob Wittman, R-Va.

“And honestly, sir, I’m getting tired of over-promising and under-delivering and I need to change that narrative,” he added.

“I want it to reflect reality. I want them to understand what can you do realistically,” Wittman said of the Block 4 plan in a scrum with reporters after the hearing, pointing to the use of tools like digital design in a “reimagined” approach.

“Black 4 ought to be an experience that can not only get us further in the software design and upgrades for F-35, but it also should inform what we’re doing in digital design and digital twin development” on next-gen fighters, Wittman said.

TR-3 Deliveries​

To harness many Block 4 upgrades, the F-35 needs a set of hardware and software known as Technology Refresh 3 (TR-3). That too has been delayed numerous times as plane maker Lockheed Martin struggles with validating the TR-3 software, prompting the Pentagon to halt deliveries of newly-built jets.

Lockheed has maintained in a most recent revised projection that it expects to start delivering jets outfitted with TR-3 in the third quarter of this year, or sometime between July and September. Today, Schmidt said the earliest those deliveries could commence would likely be in the July timeframe, though an independent review suggested instead that August or September could be more likely.

But there’s a catch — those jets would only be delivered with “truncated” software, or an interim version of TR-3 that does not include all capabilities, including ones critical for combat. It’s a plan officials have discussed for months, and Schmidt confirmed today for the first time that the program’s partners have all agreed on the criteria for the plan. “And if we meet those requirements we will truncate,” he said after the hearing.

Through the new plan, the TR-3 software would be released in two separate drops, with the first being the truncated version, Schmidt wrote. A fully combat-capable software load would then be delivered in a second release that Schmidt said could come over a year later.

Numerous problems have led to the TR-3 delay ranging from lab limitations to optimistic projections, Schmidt highlighted. Specifically, Schmidt said in written remarks that TR-3 suffers from issues with “hardware design maturity,” which “manifests in low manufacturing yields of parts necessary for aircraft production.” Additionally, the hardware problem has also led officials to “us[e] software to overcome hardware design maturity challenges.”

As a result, DoD stopped accepting new F-35s last summer, and the Pentagon has been withholding payments on sequestered planes, Bloomberg has previously reported. Asked whether that arrangement would continue under the truncation plan, Schmidt said “We will negotiate the terms and conditions of the truncation.”

After the hearing, Wittman downplayed the impact of not having the complete software upgrade, saying there is “utility” in delivering fighters without full combat capability. He reasoned that the jets can offer training opportunities and that current TR-2 training jets “can easily be combat coded and upgraded.

“Then they’re gonna have to really squeeze to make sure they can do as much as they can to compress to 12 to 16 months to get them combat capable,” he continued. “And that’s just a normal part of the process. So it’s not unusual to TR-3, it’s a normal part of getting these software upgrades into an aircraft and then go[ing] through testing it and getting it combat coded.”

Wittman’s bigger concern, he said, is just getting the software deliverable in the first place.

“I’m confident once they get this delivered, that the effort of getting it combat-coded is not going to be that difficult. The difficulty is getting the software delivered and performing,” he said.

Citing the company’s quiet period ahead of an earnings call scheduled for April 23, a Lockheed spokesperson said the company could not provide further information for this report.

@Picdelamirand-oil

Looks like you were right. Limited TR-3 this year, and full TR-3 next year, which basically means sometime in 2026 at the earliest.
 
14 hours a month of 168 hours a year seems adequate for a SE jet.
In Israël it wasn't adequate at all. They need +565% to make all the operations needed above gaza.
@Picdelamirand-oil

Looks like you were right. Limited TR-3 this year, and full TR-3 next year, which basically means sometime in 2026 at the earliest.
Nope full TR3 in 12 to 16 months at best. ANd I think that they won't be ready in 16 months.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Picdelamirand-oil
Your own charts show the price has come down. In every case, except USMC F-35C. That price should be the same as the USN, when they settle down. the F-35B is within target.

View attachment 33052
View attachment 33053

The annual cost of an aircraft is proportional to the number of hours it has flown. If the cost has fallen, it is only because the number of hours flown has also fallen.

Heures-annuelles.jpg
 
  • Agree
  • Informative
Reactions: Ironhide and Herciv