Posted on 10/01/2010 7:35:15 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
Marines Ready, But Is JSF?
Oct 1, 2010
By Bill Sweetman
Washington
Delays in vertical landing tests with the F-35B short-takeoff-and-vertical-landing (Stovl) version of Lockheed Martin’s Joint Strike Fighter are driving a reassessment of the U.S. Marine Corps’ plans for the jet’s service entry.
The Marines insist they will achieve initial operational capability (IOC), with eight ship-qualified aircraft and 20 pilots, by late 2012. That is only six months later than the IOC date set in 2006, but the Air Force and Navy have delayed their IOC dates by three years (until early 2016) because of late aircraft deliveries and a slow-starting flight-test program.
Those 2006 plans called for the F-35B to commence vertical landing tests in early 2008, but that did not happen until early 2010. By now, developmental testing of the Block 1 avionics and weapons package should have been completed, but Block 1 has yet to fly on the F-35. This year should have seen delivery of the third low-rate initial production (LRIP) batch of aircraft, but the two LRIP-1 aircraft are in the factory.
One of the actions following the JSF program’s Nunn-McCurdy breach, disclosed in March, was the launch of a technical baseline review (TBR) that supports a Defense Acquisition Board review of the program in November. USAF Materiel Command and Naval Air Systems Command dominate the TBR. Both have, until now, delegated management of the program to the JSF Program Office. One focal point of the review is the path to IOC, and the Marines—aiming for IOC 40-plus months ahead of the other services—are clearly the most difficult case.
There are three main items on the critical path to IOC for the Marines. The most basic is the vertical landing test program. Only one (BF-1) of the five test F-35Bs is configured for early vertical landing tests, and the plan called for 42 vertical landings before the remaining aircraft fly in powered-lift mode. Due to mechanical and other problems, only a dozen or so landings have been performed, and BF-2 is being modified to join the campaign.
Once the 42-landings point is reached, other B-models are expected to clear the envelope for the next critical events. One is the “ready for training” milestone—the point at which the aircraft type can be flown safely by operational pilots rather than test pilots, and without constant monitoring in the test environment. The third major item is ship qualification trials, which had been set for the first half of 2011.
The TBR is looking at the timescale for moving the program through these steps, and at the criteria set for moving from one to the next. The first assignment for the LRIP-1 aircraft—both Air Force A-models—will be to start training Marine instructors under plans discussed a year ago. Consideration is being given to extending the role of the F-35A in Marine IOC preparations.
Other issues are being examined. The problems that have held up Stovl testing will force the redesign of parts, such as actuators and cooling fans, which are failing prematurely. The redesigns will have to be tested and validated, and the modified parts put into production and retrofitted to the LRIP F-35Bs that are being built for the IOC force.
At the same time, the concept of operations for the F-35B may be changing. Discussing the future role of the Marines in August, Navy Undersecretary Robert Work noted that the wider use of weapons such as guided rockets and mortars—projected to spread to low-end threats—could end the forward operations performed by Marine AV-8B Harriers, because of the vulnerability of forward arming and refueling points and other improvised bases.
In an amphibious operation, that could confine F-35Bs to the LHA amphibious warfare ships that support Harriers. But Work raised another issue: the increasing pressure on the space and weight capacity of the LHAs, as F-35Bs and V-22s replace aircraft half their weight. Even the new LHA-6/7 America-class ships, being built without a well deck to accommodate more aircraft and fuel, will be able to carry only 6-10 JSFs in a standard air combat element.
Subsequent ships are expected to revert to a well-deck design. In that case, the Marines’ goal for the JSF—that 420 of the Navy’s 680-aircaft order should be B-models, replacing AV-8Bs and Harriers—could be ill-matched to the deck spots available.
Nice cutaway. It carries fuel in the rudder??
I pity Lockmart if they are late delivering to the Marines.
Heh!
wHY the hell doesn’t it have vertical take off? The Harrier had that and it was developed HALF A CENTURY AGO!
Design began in 1957 by Sir Sydney Camm, Ralph Hooper of Hawker Aviation and Stanley Hooker (later Sir Stanley) of the Bristol Engine Company.
It's actually a cutaway of the X-35. Among other changes, the production F-35B has a radically different upper lift fan door.
And believe it or not, the F/A-18E/F SuperHornet also stores fuel in the vertical stabilizer. (The rudder is the part at the back of the vertical stabilizer that moves.)
I’m beginning to think the Navy/Marines aren’t going to buy JSF’s...
And wasn’t Sweetman banned from writing about JSF in Aviation Week? Lockheed complained to his bosses last year about his criticism, and he was pulled from the JSF beat. Wonder if that’s now been rescinded?
Technically, it does have vertical take off, but not with any useful fuel or war load.
Why do you think Marine AV-8Bs uses a rolling takeoff from their shipboard ops? Because the Harrier doesn't have much of a payload in vertical takeoff mode, either.
Maybe, just maybe, all the branches will come to their senses and s—t can this crappy airplane.
What a shame it has gotten this far.
If we did, I suppose the USAF can continue to buy F-16s, and the Navy can continue to buy F/A-18s, but what are the Marines going to do? Their AV-8Bs are wearing out fast, and that aircraft hasn’t been manufactured in almost a decade.
What they will do is to get out of the over the horizon beach assault mission, which is the direction Gates is leaning. We should hear soon if the Marine Corps Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle gets canceled. If so, goodbye to OTH beach assault, and perhaps goodby to the Corps.
I’m sure I’m missing in understanding the vital reason for USMC SVTOL capability. Is it so the assault ships can be a swiss-army knife to include fix winged assets?
How often would a carrier group not support a landing? Do the USMC not think they can count on CAG even when it includes USMC?
Wearing out the AV-8B is predictable when it takes so many trips to haul enough to make a big boom.
The Navy just ordered an additional 124 SuperHornets. Sounds like they’re hedging their bets.
The Marine Corps just declared their upgraded AH-1Z Viper attack helicopter operational, so I'm sure any close air support required for a beach landing could be delivered via rotary winged aircraft.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.