• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)

Kirkhill

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
5,310
Points
1,160
Oldgateboatdriver said:
Just looking at those numbers for years 10 to 14: 94 aircrafts, 94, 132, 142, 136, etc. and as these years start, 264 aircraft have already been produced.

Just a stupid question: At which point does the moniker LRI (which apparently stands for "Low Rate", which at about 100 aircraft per year it isn't, "Initial", which after more than 250 airplanes have been produced it ain't) gets dropped and the thing is simply considered 'in production"?

Rafale and Saab certainly wouldn't consider the Low Rates of Production.  I wonder what a High Rate would look like.  I suspect something like about 200 per year. 
 

suffolkowner

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
946
Points
1,060
Oldgateboatdriver said:
Just looking at those numbers for years 10 to 14: 94 aircrafts, 94, 132, 142, 136, etc. and as these years start, 264 aircraft have already been produced.

Just a stupid question: At which point does the moniker LRI (which apparently stands for "Low Rate", which at about 100 aircraft per year it isn't, "Initial", which after more than 250 airplanes have been produced it ain't) gets dropped and the thing is simply considered 'in production"?

I think the move from LRIP to FRP is based on a structurally complete design that does not need further modification
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
5,310
Points
1,160
I think the move from LRIP to FRP designation is more dependent on politics and perception. 
 

Good2Golf

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
11,802
Points
1,360
Chris Pook said:
I think the move from LRIP to FRP designation is more dependent on politics and perception.

:nod:

Any time annual production approaches 5% of total anticipated production, one is probably past LRIP...150/yr on 3000+ is probably around the break-point, less the political/perception factor that Mr. Pook refers to earlier. ;)

Regards
G2G
 

Good2Golf

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
11,802
Points
1,360
Chris Pook said:
Jeez.  Well that's official then.  Now I am old.  Thanks a lot.

You have grandkids, right?  ;D
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
5,310
Points
1,160
Are you enjoying earning a second PHD?

Piling it higher and deeper you are.
 

CougarKing

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
0
Points
360
Unfortunately, the current Trudeau govt. probably won't give Lockmart a chance to prove this in any competition:

Alert 5

F-35A’s 8:0 kill ratio against F-15E

A U.S. Air Force infographic on the F-35A’s deployment to Mountain Home Air Force Base revealed that the jet scored a 8:0 kill ratio against the F-15E during mock air combat.

The victories were clocked by combat-coded F-35As from Hill Air Force Base and were part of the evaluation process needed in order to declare the jet is initially operationally capable.

The seven jets and their pilots must also demonstrate they are able to carry out basic close air support and limited SEAD/DEAD missions.

(...SNIPPED)
quote]
 

PuckChaser

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Mentor
Reaction score
2,129
Points
1,060
Sure sounds like a plane that doesn't work. These were as close to real dogfights as you can get without the 2-way live fire, no computer modeling here.
 

dapaterson

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
11,286
Points
1,090
Interesting that on the source of the Alert 5 article there is no mention of any 8:0 kill ratio.

 

PuckChaser

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Mentor
Reaction score
2,129
Points
1,060

dapaterson

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
11,286
Points
1,090
No indication of RoE that friendly / hostile air were under.  No indication of what systems were in use - did the F35s have E3 coverage and the F15s none?  Not knowing the conditions of the test, we don;t know what the test measured, or what it did not.
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
5,310
Points
1,160
14033938-a-pile-of-straw-on-a-white-background.jpg


Here you go DAP. You're welcome.  [:D
 

dapaterson

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
11,286
Points
1,090
Trusting manufacturers not to game the system.  How's that Volkswagen diesel doing for you? ;)
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
5,310
Points
1,160
Oh, me, I wouldn't be buying anything from Germany or France these days.

In fact I can't remember the last time I bought anything other than a bit of cheese from either one of them.
 

The Bread Guy

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
2,677
Points
1,260
dapaterson said:
No indication of RoE that friendly / hostile air were under.  No indication of what systems were in use - did the F35s have E3 coverage and the F15s none?  Not knowing the conditions of the test, we don;t know what the test measured, or what it did not.
There you go looking for informed opinion again ....
 

HB_Pencil

Full Member
Reaction score
0
Points
160
dapaterson said:
Trusting manufacturers not to game the system.  How's that Volkswagen diesel doing for you? ;)

That wasn't the manufacturer's graphic or claims. It was done by 388th at Hill AFB after (I believe) green flag. I agree with you that its not clear what the setup was, and the particulars, which makes it difficult to draw specific conclusions.

That being said,  I'd suggest that in my research and interactions with individuals who operate the F-22 and the F-35, that this sort of "exchange rate," will be pretty common... even in numerically unbalanced scenarios against the new fighter. There have been several other exercises with similar outcomes (some of which were formal and others' not so, some of which have been made public) as well as other comments, that illustrate the aircraft's capabilities.

You mention the E-3 in your post, which I think really illustrates how different the F-35 is to other aircraft. For aircraft like the F-15 the E-3 is viewed as a force multiplier, giving the pilot a better situational awareness at all levels. The Sentry only provides a marginal benefit for F-35s: JSF pilots have better situational awareness in their immediate tactical environment due to the higher data input and sensor fusion systems, and perhaps equal operational perspectives due to sensor fusion and Link-16 connectivity. E-3s' intelligence gathering and analysis capabilities are less valuable to a pilot who arguably has better situational awareness of his immediate surroundings: the Sentry basically becomes another sensor platform feeding raw data into the F-35. Probably the best way to understand it is that the F-35 has roughly as good maneuverability as other aircraft, with superior situational awareness and low observability to boot: you're not likely to have many losses to other aircraft.

I'm sure that there will also be setups (likely at Redflag) where you'll see a F-22, Rafale, Eurofighter, or a Growler get gun cannon footage of them taking down the hot new F-35, accompanied by the usual chorus of criticism about what a terrible aircraft this is. However those are usually done to place pilots of the F-35 in a disadvantageous position that strips away all of the aircraft's innate advantages, and focus on specific skills at the merge that they are perhaps less competent in.

I know this all sounds like a very positive review, but its pretty hard to ignore the operators' views on this topic, and the growing body of results. I think much of the negative opinion in the early years were by individuals who had never operated, much less even seen the JSF, reacting to what was viewed as a plane that was promised to be super duper "stealth fighter." However as increasing numbers of pilots are trained and operated on the aircraft, and others try to confront it in exercises, the opinion has changed significantly. I believe that outside of some individuals who operated with F-22s over the Levant, very few Canadian pilots have been exposed to this sort of capability, which is why its not well understood outside of certain circles within DND.
 

HB_Pencil

Full Member
Reaction score
0
Points
160
suffolkowner said:
I think the move from LRIP to FRP is based on a structurally complete design that does not need further modification

I'm not 100% on this, but the Full Rate ProductionDecision Review can only occur after DOT&E has completed its work and the design is complete, so there are statutory elements to it. Then again people think DOT&E is a political body, so....

However it has significant effects on the program. Perhaps the largest is the ability for it to access 10 USC 2306b, which is the Multi year procurement approach. The reason why DoD wanted to do a "block buy" was that without FRP, they can't actually use the proper multi-year approach, so they needed an alternative.
 

caocao

Member
Reaction score
0
Points
210
dapaterson said:
Trusting manufacturers not to game the system.  How's that Volkswagen diesel doing for you? ;)

Well I am very happy with my TDI, I'll let you know tomorrow if I feel the same way when they announce the package they will be offering to try to keep their customer.
 
Top