Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)

FMC is "all required missions" not "all assigned missions" which gives a hint
as to its origin: the requirements docs.

Which in turn makes FMC of limited operational utility because no
commander has a fighter simultaneously tasked for say CAS and DCA.

And modern mission planning software that will run on laptops can take
fine-grain aircraft configurations and predict mission outcomes.

FMC goals are haphazardly devised and assigned, may not be in ORDs
or maintenance contracts. Example: OSD rescinded the 80% MC
directive for FY20 and beyond which apparently the author of that
article doesn't know about.

FMC reporting dramatically under-predicted GW1 fighter performance and
the operational side within DOD has been trying to move away from it ever since.
 
TomcatViP said:
The mistake is mine obviously. I should have correctly written starboard to name the side of the damaged engines and pod.
Regarding the damages on port side (hence left and right on the photo), don't forget the massive fuel leak (photo and probably comms - mentioned by the pilot in his mayday call). I won't be surprised if he flew through debris. That could also explain the single prop blade missing on engine #1 as the pod.

damaged-kc-130-png.641803
Click to expand...

I saw same airframe Over fortnight earlier here at RAF Mildenhall.

0BB07BAD-38AE-4070-8ACD-ADCAE2BFB6FF.jpeg

As it had gone Tech week or so earlier. Anyhow if you remember my post with my photos of VMFA-211 Wake Island Avengers arriving here at RAF Marham, for their work up on QE carrier well this KC-130J turned up few days later to Marham carrying more support kit etc. It took off and headed to RAF Brize Norton way then went tech and ended up being at Mildenhall for week or so, did s couple of maintenance test flights after be8ng fixed then went back home to Cherry Point

45FF3711-2515-48A8-8357-0C08321F8302.jpeg

I took this when At RAF Lakenheath when it Finally left ..

cheers
 
Next F-35 Contracts Under Negotiation, Deal Expected by Late September

The contracting strategy is to negotiate a “base year” contract for Lot 15, with “two single-year options (Lots 16 and 17),” a JPO spokeswoman said. While the air vehicles are under negotiation, the “propulsion Lot 15-17 proposal is currently in technical evaluation,” the spokeswoman said. Although Lockheed quotes prices publicly for F-35s with engines included, the government negotiates with the engine maker separately. The Lightning II is powered by Pratt’s F135 turbofan.

The program office expects to conclude both the air vehicle and propulsion talks within fiscal 2021, the spokeswoman said. Lot 15 air vehicles “are planned to be fully funded and awarded in FY’21,” but the Lot 16 and 17 options would be exercised in fiscal year 2022 and 2023, respectively, “when funding becomes available.”
 
Amazing picture of an F-35 spotted low over Lebanon (notice the missile rails) :

EslVWhsW8AA8Zg5


defence-blog.com

Israeli F-35 stealth fighter spotted in Lebanese airspace

A Lockheed Martin F-35 stealth fighter belonging to the Israeli Air Force has been photographed flying low over Lebanon. Lebanese militant group Hezbollah has released pictures of F-35I stealth fighter over Lebanon. At the same time, they mistakenly calling it an F-15 aircraft and caused some...
defence-blog.com defence-blog.com
 
Available here:
hushkit.net

What is good and bad about the F-35 cockpit: A ‘Panther’ pilot’s guide to modern cockpits

The F-35 helmet: does it show too much too small? My background – Current F-35 pilot and Weapons School graduate. I Have flown the Harrier II and F/A-18 Hornet operationally as well as instructing …
hushkit.net hushkit.net
Original link had one ']' too many.
Discussion of several aircraft - Harrier GR.7/9 AV-8B, F/A-18A/C, F-35. The gist of it on the F-35: situational awareness like nothing he experienced before, voice-control not much use, on helmet-mounted display:
The technology of the helmet is great, but I’d take a HUD any day. It all comes down to physics – you can only shrink things so much before they start to become degraded, and HUDs have bigger optics than helmets…currently.
Click to expand...

Some trouble with touch screens, I would think not specific to the F-35:
the cockpit is beautiful to look at – nothing analogue, all digital with about 10 actual switches in the cockpit. Notice I say beautiful to look at, not necessarily beautiful to interact with! In theory the all-glass display is great. It’s touchscreen, you can set it up to show pretty much anything you want in any layout you want. Take, for example, a fuel display. You can have it in a large window that shows you everything you could possibly want to know about the aircraft’s fuel system; the contents of each tank, which pumps are operating, fuel temperature, centre of gravity etc. Or you can shrink it into a smaller window that only shows more basic info. Or you don’t even display it at all because the Function Access Buttons (FAB) along the top of the display always has a small fuel section with the essential info visible at all times. That’s the beauty of the display – size and customisation. The drawback is in the complete lack of tactile response. It can be challenging to press the correct ‘button’ on the display whenever the jet is in motion as it is quite a bumpy ride at times. At present I am pressing the wrong part of the screen about 20% of the time in flight due to either mis-identification, or more commonly by my finger getting jostled around in turbulence or under G. One of the biggest drawbacks is that you can’t brace your hand against anything whilst typing – think how much easier it is to type on a smartphone with your thumbs versus trying to stab at a virtual keyboard on a large tablet with just your index finger.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
I don't see how someone would be embarrassed by the feeling of a 30+ years old experienced pilots expressing its feelings regarding the practicality of new technologies like the touchscreen that need from time to time double typing or the fact that there's isn't anymore a HUD.

The rest of the post was rather positive for the F-35 vanting the superior SA that its systems provide to the pilot (better than F-22 was the word), the improved helmet and so on..
 
Arjen said:
Some trouble with touch-screens, I would think not specific to the F-35:
the cockpit is beautiful to look at – nothing analogue, all digital with about 10 actual switches in the cockpit. Notice I say beautiful to look at, not necessarily beautiful to interact with! In theory the all-glass display is great. It’s touchscreen, you can set it up to show pretty much anything you want in any layout you want. Take, for example, a fuel display. You can have it in a large window that shows you everything you could possibly want to know about the aircraft’s fuel system; the contents of each tank, which pumps are operating, fuel temperature, centre of gravity etc. Or you can shrink it into a smaller window that only shows more basic info. Or you don’t even display it at all because the Function Access Buttons (FAB) along the top of the display always has a small fuel section with the essential info visible at all times. That’s the beauty of the display – size and customisation. The drawback is in the complete lack of tactile response. It can be challenging to press the correct ‘button’ on the display whenever the jet is in motion as it is quite a bumpy ride at times. At present I am pressing the wrong part of the screen about 20% of the time in flight due to either mis-identification, or more commonly by my finger getting jostled around in turbulence or under G. One of the biggest drawbacks is that you can’t brace your hand against anything whilst typing – think how much easier it is to type on a smartphone with your thumbs versus trying to stab at a virtual keyboard on a large tablet with just your index finger.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

The USN decided to revert to more physical controls after the Fitzgerald incident

www.bbc.com

US Navy to ditch touch screen ship controls

Familiar wheels and throttle controls will replace "overly complex" touch screens, says US Navy.
www.bbc.com www.bbc.com
 
It sounds like the F-35's cockpit has trade offs. A much greater ability to view information combined with a decreased ability to interact with it reliably. A much more informative helmet view but with more limitations of how much info can be viewed compared to a HUD. The touch screen was always going to be a bit of gamble I feel. I wonder if the stick/throttle controls can interact with it for more basic commands?
 
Josh_TN said:
The touch screen was always going to be a bit of gamble I feel. I wonder if the stick/throttle controls can interact with it for more basic commands?
Click to expand...
They can; one of the hats on the throttle lets you slew around a cursor, though I don't know how that works across various portals on the display - I would assume you can't slew the cursor from one side of the screen all the way to the other, and that it wouldn't be available on every page, but that the pilot would have to use another hat to toggle something like a sensor (or portal) of interest. Maybe I'm wrong though and the cursor can be used anywhere on the display.

I may not be an F-35 pilot, but I think moving away from touch screens would be regression - instead I think they need to better leverage modern consumer and commercial touch screen tech to incorporate things like capacitive touch layers (with IR as a back-up in case chemical warfare agents or water / moisture screws with the capacitive functionality), as well as the algorithms that've been developed to produce things like palm rejection in good modern tablets / touchscreen laptops. Other things such as predictive / speculative object selection could also be trialed / investigated, where if a pilot's finger misses (eg) a virtual button, but there are indications that the touch wasn't accurate (such as the finger / cursor rapidly sliding across the screen) then an algorithm can select the button they were closest to touching. Or if the finger has a lot of erratic movement around the screen (perhaps with accelerometer data indicating turbulence), in an area where there are multiple virtual buttons or targets on a display, the algorithm can go ahead and select the one that statistically (or based on the F-35's combat ID systems and threat prioritisation algorithms) that's more important. For example, if there's a hostile and a friendly close to each other on a tactical display, there's indications of turbulence / buffeting, and the pilot's finger has hit the screen closer to the friendly track, the display might instead select the hostile track.

I know such a system would have plenty of potential for error, but if you combine it with a physical manual override switch (just use one of the ~20 hats and switches on the HOTAS with the right context, or if you really want, add a new physical switch), I think it'd be sufficiently safe. Have the software written by someone competent with a reasonable fixed-cost contract (the concept / tech isn't cutting edge in the consumer world) and I think it could surprise people with how accurate it is (a number of consumer touchscreen devices already do this; the word prediction on good phone keyboards like Swiftkey (owned by Microsoft) can do an amazing job despite the open-ended problem it faces (but which the F-35's display doesn't)).
 
Last edited:
The advantages of the large display (the pilot touches on the size and flexibility) are such that clearly unified displays are here to stay. It sounds like the interface could use some work, but it doesn't sound like even the pilot in question necessarily wanted to revert - just noted the limitation. I suspect some work can be done with predictive selections - I'm thinking the most likely choice could be highlighted allowing for a simple HOTAS click, for instance. I also wonder if menus couldn't just temporarily take up a lot more of the screen to make the touch areas physically bigger. 20" x 8" should allow for big buttons if the menu temporarily overlapped other parts of the display.
 
Reading that post, I'm somewhat reminded of drivers who "just prefer" the feeling of a manual transmission over an automatic, even though automatics now have 8-10 gears, multiple shift modes, manual actuation paddles, and get better fuel economy. He's not wrong, necessarily...preference does play into operational efficiency, but I wonder if a nugget going into F-35s straight from UPT would long for the days of banks of buttons and a fixed HUD?
 
Dragon029 said:
Josh_TN said:
The touch screen was always going to be a bit of gamble I feel. I wonder if the stick/throttle controls can interact with it for more basic commands?
Click to expand...
They can; one of the hats on the throttle lets you slew around a cursor, though I don't know how that works across various portals on the display - I would assume you can't slew the cursor from one side of the screen all the way to the other, and that it wouldn't be available on every page, but that the pilot would have to use another hat to toggle something like a sensor (or portal) of interest. Maybe I'm wrong though and the cursor can be used anywhere on the display.

I may not be an F-35 pilot, but I think moving away from touch screens would be regression - instead I think they need to better leverage modern consumer and commercial touch screen tech to incorporate things like capacitive touch layers (with IR as a back-up in case chemical warfare agents or water / moisture screws with the capacitive functionality), as well as the algorithms that've been developed to produce things like palm rejection in good modern tablets / touchscreen laptops. Other things such as predictive / speculative object selection could also be trialed / investigated, where if a pilot's finger misses (eg) a virtual button, but there are indications that the touch wasn't accurate (such as the finger / cursor rapidly sliding across the screen) then an algorithm can select the button they were closest to touching. Or if the finger has a lot of erratic movement around the screen (perhaps with accelerometer data indicating turbulence), in an area where there are multiple virtual buttons or targets on a display, the algorithm can go ahead and select the one that statistically (or based on the F-35's combat ID systems and threat prioritisation algorithms) that's more important. For example, if there's a hostile and a friendly close to each other on a tactical display, there's indications of turbulence / buffeting, and the pilot's finger has hit the screen closer to the friendly track, the display might instead select the hostile track.

I know such a system would have plenty of potential for error, but if you combine it with a physical manual override switch (just use one of the ~20 hats and switches on the HOTAS with the right context, or if you really want, add a new physical switch), I think it'd be sufficiently safe. Have the software written by someone competent with a reasonable fixed-cost contract (the concept / tech isn't cutting edge in the consumer world) and I think it could surprise people with how accurate it is (a number of consumer touchscreen devices already do this; the word prediction on good phone keyboards like Swiftkey (owned by Microsoft) can do an amazing job despite the open-ended problem it faces (but which the F-35's display doesn't)).
Click to expand...
Heck, you could even program it to expand the display around the probable area that the button push was - bigger buttons. Quick tap of the one you want, or tap a revert button if there’s been a computer mess up.

(Oops! Just saw Josh made the same suggestion. Good suggestion Josh! ;) )
 
Josh_TN said:
The advantages of the large display (the pilot touches on the size and flexibility) are such that clearly unified displays are here to stay. It sounds like the interface could use some work, but it doesn't sound like even the pilot in question necessarily wanted to revert - just noted the limitation. I suspect some work can be done with predictive selections - I'm thinking the most likely choice could be highlighted allowing for a simple HOTAS click, for instance. I also wonder if menus couldn't just temporarily take up a lot more of the screen to make the touch areas physically bigger. 20" x 8" should allow for big buttons if the menu temporarily overlapped other parts of the display.
Click to expand...
Touchscreens and to a lesser extent voice commands are trying to solve the problem of HOTAS cursor slew rates on
large format displays; you can either slew quickly or accurately both not both.

A combination of eye tracking and head tracking for cursor slew is, in conjunction with the interfaces above,
probably the right solution but neither are at a sufficiently high level of maturity and
operationally suitability (ex: under high G) yet.

Collectively, it's all being examined under the AF's "Have Rhino" effort.
 
Eye tracking would be difficult. Most of look down action are snap memory print to stay focused on the outside situation.
 
marauder2048 said:
Josh_TN said:
The advantages of the large display (the pilot touches on the size and flexibility) are such that clearly unified displays are here to stay. It sounds like the interface could use some work, but it doesn't sound like even the pilot in question necessarily wanted to revert - just noted the limitation. I suspect some work can be done with predictive selections - I'm thinking the most likely choice could be highlighted allowing for a simple HOTAS click, for instance. I also wonder if menus couldn't just temporarily take up a lot more of the screen to make the touch areas physically bigger. 20" x 8" should allow for big buttons if the menu temporarily overlapped other parts of the display.
Click to expand...
Touchscreens and to a lesser extent voice commands are trying to solve the problem of HOTAS cursor slew rates on
large format displays; you can either slew quickly or accurately both not both.
Click to expand...

Give them 8000 dpi mice. ;)
 
Hydroman said:
Flyaway said:
Regarding the F-35 sale to the UAE.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1354501800271994886
View: https://mobile.twitter.com/KThomasDC/status/1354501800271994886
Click to expand...
I know this is a little off topic, but we (USA) hand out F-35's like candy but would not offer/allow the F-22 to Australia or Japan as an example when requested, remarkable.
Click to expand...
Japan had a recent history of handing over $ecret data to not so friendly nations back then. You are talking about 25 years ago. So that boxes with denying Japan. Also there was trepidation about Japan having such a powerful airforce and pissing off china. Australia doesn't make sense... But the environment wasnt as dominated by hyper rich billionaires back then either. The 35/jsf was a international money making tool for us from what... 1994? but bringing in countries like Turkey doesn't make sense unless you look at the $$$. The 22 was bleeding edge in every way... I think its the first fighter to use fiber optics as example. The rest of the world has grown up since then.
 
sferrin said:
Hydroman said:
Flyaway said:
Regarding the F-35 sale to the UAE.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1354501800271994886
View: https://mobile.twitter.com/KThomasDC/status/1354501800271994886
Click to expand...
I know this is a little off topic, but we (USA) hand out F-35's like candy but would not offer/allow the F-22 to Australia or Japan as an example when requested, remarkable.
Click to expand...
F-35 isn't an F-22. Obviously.
Click to expand...
Still, a very advanced jet, lots of capability and technology. Might as well let a few older B-2's go at a discounted price, with a coupon of course.
 
Hydroman said:
sferrin said:
Hydroman said:
Flyaway said:
Regarding the F-35 sale to the UAE.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1354501800271994886
View: https://mobile.twitter.com/KThomasDC/status/1354501800271994886
Click to expand...
I know this is a little off topic, but we (USA) hand out F-35's like candy but would not offer/allow the F-22 to Australia or Japan as an example when requested, remarkable.
Click to expand...
F-35 isn't an F-22. Obviously.
Click to expand...
Still, a very advanced jet, lots of capability and technology. Might as well let a few older B-2's go at a discounted price, with a coupon of course.
Click to expand...
You forgot the /sarc.
 
www.airforcemag.com

Biden’s Pentagon to Keep Turkey Out of F-35 Program | Air & Space Forces Magazine

The Biden administration is continuing its predecessor’s policy of excluding Turkey from the international F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program.
www.airforcemag.com www.airforcemag.com

President Joe Biden could end those sanctions this December if he certifies to Congress that Turkey and “any person acting on its behalf” no longer owns the S-400 or a newer version, that Russian nationals or its contractors are operating or maintaining air defense systems in Turkey, and that the U.S. has received “reliable assurances” from Ankara that it will not run afoul of CAATSA again, according to the 2021 defense policy law.

Turkey’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said last year it wanted the U.S. to handle the dispute “through dialogue and diplomacy,” not sanctions.
Click to expand...
 
Wyvern said:
Yes, because that worked before.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately Turkey has been pursuing an agressive foreign policy by proxy: Libya and Nagorno-Karabakh, this is as likely to be tied to those conflicts as to the S-400 purchase.
 
Some days ago the Cavour Aircraft Carrier, on its way to Patuxent River to take the F-35B onboard, take a break with 1 day rest in Cadiz mooring next to the Spanish Juan Carlos I Aircraft Carrier:

www.defensa.com

El español Juan Carlos I y el italiano Cavour: la Base Naval de Rota acoge dos tercios de los portaaviones de la Unión Europea

El 2 de febrero la Base Aeronaval de Rota (Cádiz) acogió, de manera excepcional, dos tercios de los navíos de la UE (Unión Europea) con capacidad de...
www.defensa.com www.defensa.com
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom