The F-35 Discussion Topic (No Holds Barred II)

[Triton]

F-35C LM Test Pilot Shake Rattle Roll DT-1 TailHOOK 2015 Brief

Published on Sep 14, 2015

https://youtu.be/psHLxerf7t8

 

[Triton]

Business News | Mon Sep 14, 2015 10:13pm EDT
"Pratt prepping for big production increase on F-35 jet engines"
NATIONAL HARBOR, Md. | By Andrea Shalal

Source:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/15/us-united-tech-pratt-fighter-idUSKCN0RF05T20150915

Pratt & Whitney, a unit of United Technologies Corp (UTX.N), on Monday said it is working closely with suppliers to prepare for a large ramp-up in production in coming years of the F135 engine that powers the Lockheed Martin Corp (LMT.N) F-35 fighter jet.

Bennett Croswell, who heads Pratt's military engines division, said the company was seeking to ensure it had at least two suppliers for every major component, and was also carrying out production readiness reviews of key suppliers, and the companies that build parts for them.

"Capacity is good, but we have to make sure we get the quality right as well," Croswell told Reuters at the annual Air Force Association conference. "We're ready for the ramp."

The Air Force general who runs the $391 billion F-35 program for the Pentagon said last week that production of the stealth supersonic fighter jet is accelerating rapidly, but the steep ramp-up could stress suppliers.

Production of the jets is slated to rise from 40 planes a year to more than 120 a year over the next three years.

Croswell said the company was in negotiations with the Pentagon about 160 engines in the next two low-rate production contracts, and agreement should be reached before year-end.

He said the ninth batch would include 60 engines, rising to 100 in the tenth batch, with the increase enabling further cost reductions. "It will be a good thing from a cost perspective."

Pratt has already delivered 240 engines, he said, noting the company was meeting cost reduction commitments set in 2009 and a 90-percent reliability target was five years ahead of schedule.

Pratt is encouraging U.S. officials to consider engine upgrades that would draw on the company's work on two separate engine improvement programs run by the U.S. Navy and the Air Force, and could improve the engine's fuel economy by 7 percent.

Croswell said the upgrades could be installed on the engines when they come in for major maintenance every eight to 10 years.

Pratt also plans to submit a bid in coming days for a separate $1 billion Air Force program aimed at developing a next-generation jet engine with 25 percent greater fuel economy and 10 percent more thrust.

The new "adaptive" engine program aims to develop an engine that can be configured to optimize the jets to fly fast or cover long distances. General Electric Co (GE.N) is also participating in the program.

(Reporting by Andrea Shalal; Editing by Ken Wills)

 

[Triton]

"Pentagon Testing Office Calls Foul on F-35B 'Operational Test'”
by Mandy Smithberger and Dan Grazier

September 14, 2015

Source:
http://www.pogo.org/our-work/straus-military-reform-project/weapons/2015/pentagon-testing-office-calls-foul.html?referrer=http://t.co/q47smXsCvI

"The Marine Corps triumphantly declared. . ."

Clearly the beginning of an objective, fact-filled, analysis. :

I would have preferred to post the original DOT&E memo if I had it.

 

[LowObservable]

http://www.pogoarchives.org/straus/2015-9-1-DoD-FOIA-ocr.pdf


You're welcome. Kinda busy but it will be fun to see the efforts to put a positive spin on this puppy.

 

[Triton]

http://www.pogoarchives.org/straus/2015-9-1-DoD-FOIA-ocr.pdf


You're welcome. Kinda busy but it will be fun to see the efforts to put a positive spin on this puppy.

Thank you posting. I should have realized that there was a hotlink to the original memo.

 

[quellish]

True but wouldn't you say that if the "spikes" on your bowtie plot are 0.001 db vs 0.1 db that that is significant?

You seem to be saying the highest backscatter magnitude (spike) is one of those numbers.
If that is the case I would say that air defenses should not be an issue anymore considering the aircraft is equipped with a quantum mechanical singularity.

 

[sferrin]

True but wouldn't you say that if the "spikes" on your bowtie plot are 0.001 db vs 0.1 db that that is significant?

You seem to be saying the highest backscatter magnitude (spike) is one of those numbers.
If that is the case I would say that air defenses should not be an issue anymore considering the aircraft is equipped with a quantum mechanical singularity.

I'm saying that the size of the bowtie matters as well as the shape. Wouldn't you agree?

 

[sferrin]

http://www.pogoarchives.org/straus/2015-9-1-DoD-FOIA-ocr.pdf


You're welcome. Kinda busy but it will be fun to see the efforts to put a positive spin on this puppy.

You act as though you believe ever other new fighter has had a trouble free, completely predictable development. Tell me again how many years from EAP to the Typhoon being usable in service? (And that was just another 4th gen aircraft with nothing particularly new.) And they signed on for Meteor 15 years ago yet it's still not in service. Hmmmm. Glass houses.

 

[LowObservable]

Spin Tactic 1 - Point frantically at other programs. So what? The parallels/differences between this and various other projects have been explained to you over and over again.


The issue here appears to be the deliberate attempt to portray a very preliminary trial as an operational test.

 

[Dragon029]

It'd be interesting to see a similar report from the ORI.

 

[sferrin]

Spin Tactic 1 - Point frantically at other programs. So what? The parallels/differences between this and various other projects have been explained to you over and over again.

Show me where I've put any "spin" on this. Pointing out bias is hardly "spinning" things.

The issue here appears to be the deliberate attempt to portray a very preliminary trial as an operational test.

Clearly we should cancel the program because a manager got caught putting the wrong title on the tests. Fire the manager and move on.

 

[LowObservable]

Spin Tactic 2 - Pretend that it's some kind of low-level wording error and not something that came straight down from 8th and Eye.

 

[sferrin]

Spin Tactic 2 - Pretend that it's some kind of low-level wording error and not something that came straight down from 8th and Eye.

Spin Tactic 3 - Pretend the title of something actually matters. What next? A three page spread on low tire pressure? Nobody lied about what they actually accomplished. They said, "this is what we did" and low and behold that's what they did. Were you deceived into thinking there was a flight deck full of aircraft onboard while they did their testing? You must have had different information than the rest of the world because all of the released imagery and videos showed pretty much an empty deck except for the F-35Bs.

 

[Grey Havoc]

Gentlemen, let's face it; The F-35 is a busted flush, and arguably has been one since the beginning. The only question really left now to consider is how far away is the final act and how it will play out.

 

[Triton]

From May--

"F-35B Operational Test Begins aboard USS Wasp"
May 20, 2015

Source:
http://navaltoday.com/2015/05/20/f-35b-operational-test-begins-aboard-uss-wasp/

Selected quote:

OT-1 will assess the integration of the F-35B while operating across a wide array of flight and deck operations. Specific OT-1 objectives include demonstrating and assessing day and night flight operations in varying aircraft configurations; digital interoperability of aircraft and ship systems; F-35B landing signal officer’s launch and recovery software; day and night weapons loading; and all aspects of maintenance, logistics, and sustainment support of the F-35B while deployed at sea. Additionally, the U.S. Navy-Marine Corps team is working closely with Naval Sea Systems Command to assess specific modifications made to USS WASP to support future deployments.

Data collected and lessons learned during OT-1 will lay the groundwork for F-35B deployments aboard U.S. Navy amphibious carriers following the Marine Corps’ F-35B initial operating capability declaration planned for this coming July.

 

[Triton]

From June--

"USMC studies F-35B operational test data, looks ahead to deployment"
Marina Malenic, Washington, DC - IHS Jane's Defence Weekly
10 June 2015

Source:
http://www.janes.com/article/52122/usmc-studies-f-35b-operational-test-data-looks-ahead-to-deployment

Key Points

The US Marine Corps is studying data collected during F-35B OT-1
The corps still intends to declare the jet ready for combat in July

The US Marine Corps (USMC) is studying data collected during the first operational test (OT-1) of its Lockheed Martin F-35B Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter and expects to declare the fifth-generation fighter ready for combat by late July, the USMC's deputy commandant for aviation told IHS Jane's during an 8 June interview at the Pentagon.

"If the final operational readiness inspection [ORI] is completed in July, then we plan to declare IOC [initial operational capability] at that point," said Lieutenant General Jon Davis.

The general has ordered the Marine Corps-led ORI team to report the findings of a final inspection of all 10 operational F-35Bs to him. The Marine Corps commandant will then make a final IOC decision based on Lt Gen Davis' recommendation.

Lt Gen Davis noted that USMC and US Navy personnel conducted 106 F-35B take-offs and landings aboard USS Wasp amphibious assault ship. In addition to confirming reliability of the Block 2B software configuration with which the marine corps plans to deploy, the exercises also confirmed aircraft-to-ship network communications interoperability, he said.

In addition to qualifying pilots on F-35B day and night operations, the exercise allowed for training and certification of landing signal officers (LSOs) and proved the efficacy of the aircraft's LSO launch and recovery software, the general noted. It also documented the crew's ability to conduct both day and night maintenance activities, according to a marine corps spokesman.

During OT-1, the marines also ferried an F135 power module: the heaviest portion of the F-35's engine, to USS Wasp on a Bell-Boeing V-22 Osprey outfitted with a special carriage module designed by F135 prime contractor Pratt & Whitney. The capability could someday enable the USMC to resupply all aircraft carriers and amphibious ships with both the F-35B and F-35C engine modules, the spokesman said.

Other OT-1 milestones included completion of ordnance loading and unloading of the F-35B at night on 27 May aboard USS Wasp . They loaded Guided Bomb Unit 12, Guided Bomb Unit 32, and AIM-120 Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missiles, the spokesman said.

 

[Triton]

Is VMFA-121 with their F-35B fighter aircraft running Block 2B software capable of conducting close air support, offensive and defensive counter air, air interdiction, assault support escort and armed reconnaissance as part of a Marine Air Ground Task Force, or in support of the Joint Force?

 

[sferrin]

Gentlemen, let's face it; The F-35 is a busted flush, and arguably has been one since the beginning. The only question really left now to consider is how far away is the final act and how it will play out.

There are those who are certainly hoping that's the case. And if you accept what they say as gospel I could see why you would believe it. If you talk to those who ACTUALLY know though they say something altogether different. The F-35 will be flying long after the last Eurocanard has been retired.

 

[SpudmanWP]

Is VMFA-121 with their F-35B fighter aircraft running Block 2B software capable of conducting close air support, offensive and defensive counter air, air interdiction, assault support escort and armed reconnaissance as part of a Marine Air Ground Task Force, or in support of the Joint Force?

yes

The plane was declared operational by Gen. Joe Dunford, the outgoing Marine Corps commandant — and incoming Chairman of the Joint Chiefs — in a July 31 announcement.
"I am pleased to announce that VMFA-121 has achieved initial operational capability in the F-35B, as defined by requirements outlined in the June 2014 Joint Report to Congressional Defense Committees," Dunford said in a statement. "VMFA-121 has ten aircraft in the Block 2B configuration with the requisite performance envelope and weapons clearances, to include the training, sustainment capabilities, and infrastructure to deploy to an austere site or a ship. It is capable of conducting close air support, offensive and defensive counter air, air interdiction, assault support escort and armed reconnaissance as part of a Marine Air Ground Task Force, or in support of the Joint Force."

http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/air-space/2015/07/31/f35-operational-marine-corps-joint-strike-fighter/30937689/

 

[sferrin]

From May--

From June--

And? What did they claim they did that they did not? Show me proof somebody lied. Saying, "we plan on doing this" and then falling short is not lying. As the saying goes, "shit happens". (Which is why, 15 years after the UK signed up for Meteor on it's Typhoons it's still flying AIM-120s.) All I'm seeing is a lot of hoopla and no evidence of wrong doing.

 

[AeroFranz]

Gentlemen, let's face it; The F-35 is a busted flush, and arguably has been one since the beginning. The only question really left now to consider is how far away is the final act and how it will play out.

F-35 is too big to fail. There is no backup. This is the airplane we have and that we will keep, like it or not.
If deficiencies will arise, they will be fixed at the tune of billions over the lifespan, or requirements will simply be relaxed, limitations accepted.
It is also possible that the value will be in its systems which are either better than we think or will keep improving ahead of the enemies' over the lifespan of the program. I would like to be pleasantly surprised in that sense.

I think criticism of the program is deserved, and pointing at other unsuccessful programs is meaningless.
If someone's an idiot, and in his defense he points at all his other friends who also are idiots, guess what -- that person's still an idiot.

 

[Triton]

And? What did they claim they did that they did not? Show me proof somebody lied. Saying, "we plan on doing this" and then falling short is not lying. As the saying goes, "shit happens". (Which is why, 15 years after the UK signed up for Meteor on it's Typhoons it's still flying AIM-120s.) All I'm seeing is a lot of hoopla and no evidence of wrong doing.

From the memo, formal Initial Operational Test and Evaluation (IOT&E) will occur with the Block 3F F-35B. The articles state what they were testing with Operational Test One (OT-1). OT-1 was not an operational test as defined by the DOT&E. It was LowObservable who said that it was a "deliberate attempt to portray a very preliminary trial as an operational test" coming from 8th and Eye.

 

[VTOLicious]

The F-35B IOC is defined as:

•One squadron of 10 F-35B aircraft with required spares, support equipment, tools, technical publications, and a functional Autonomic Logistic information system (ALIS V2) including enabling peripherals.
•Squadron will be manned with trained and certified personnel capable of conducting autonomous operations.
•Aircraft in a Block 2B software configuration with the requisite performance envelope, mission systems, sensors, and weapon clearances.
•Home base supporting infrastructure and facilities ready and capable of supporting and sustaining operations.
•Qualifications, certifications, and L-class amphibious carrier alterations completed to enable F-35B operations.
•Qualifications and certifications for deploying the F-35B to austere expeditionary sites.
•Ability to execute CAS; limited offensive and defensive counter-air; air interdiction; air support escort; armed reconnaissance; and limited suppression of enemy air defenses missions in concert with Marine Air Ground Task Force resources and capabilities within the performance envelope, mission systems, sensors, and weapons clearances provided by the 2B fleet release.
•Naval Aviation Enterprise (NAE), Joint Program Office (JPO) and contractor procedures, processes, and infrastructure capable of sustaining operations of the IOC squadron.

Source: Marine Aviation Plan 2015, page 33

 

[Triton]

Which criterion got the waiver that could not be met in time?

Source:
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/opinion-why-the-f-35bs-ioc-milestone-matters-415474/

 

[sferrin]

Gentlemen, let's face it; The F-35 is a busted flush, and arguably has been one since the beginning. The only question really left now to consider is how far away is the final act and how it will play out.

F-35 is too big to fail. There is no backup. This is the airplane we have and that we will keep, like it or not.

It's not a matter of "too big to fail" it's a matter of having no viable alternative that would cost less, perform better, and be available sooner. Sure, people will trot out their suggestions, then the hand-waving begins once it's pointed out they don't meet requirements. It still amazes me how many people (who really ought to know better) continue to think something as complex as the F-35 program could possibly run as smoothly as the local McD's.

 

[Triton]

yes

The plane was declared operational by Gen. Joe Dunford, the outgoing Marine Corps commandant — and incoming Chairman of the Joint Chiefs — in a July 31 announcement.
"I am pleased to announce that VMFA-121 has achieved initial operational capability in the F-35B, as defined by requirements outlined in the June 2014 Joint Report to Congressional Defense Committees," Dunford said in a statement. "VMFA-121 has ten aircraft in the Block 2B configuration with the requisite performance envelope and weapons clearances, to include the training, sustainment capabilities, and infrastructure to deploy to an austere site or a ship. It is capable of conducting close air support, offensive and defensive counter air, air interdiction, assault support escort and armed reconnaissance as part of a Marine Air Ground Task Force, or in support of the Joint Force."

http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/air-space/2015/07/31/f35-operational-marine-corps-joint-strike-fighter/30937689/

I've previously read the statement by Gen. Joe Dunford declaring IOC of the F-35B on July 31, 2015. The first F-35B deployment is scheduled to take place in 2017, with VMFA-121 moving to Iwakuni, Japan. Deployment aboard an amphibious assault ship is scheduled for 2018. I am sure that VMFA-121 will get whatever Block software upgrades are available between now and then.

 

[sferrin]

I guess I'm not seeing what part of his statement you're having a problem with. (Unless you think there's nothing more to CAS than shooting a gun anyway.)

 

[SpudmanWP]

I am sure that VMFA-121 will get whatever Block software upgrades are available between now and then.

There is no significant functional difference between Block 2B and 3i and 2017 is too early for them to get 3F.

 

[Triton]

I am sure that VMFA-121 will get whatever Block software upgrades are available between now and then.

There is no significant functional difference between Block 2B and 3i and 2017 is too early for them to get 3F.

OK, the last I read was that Block 3F would be delivered in mid-2017 which would be before deployment to an amphibious assault ship. What is the latest news for release of Block 3F? Block 4.1 still scheduled for late 2019?

Source:
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/air-space/strike/2015/09/14/long-term-cr-would-impact-f-35-software-development-us-airforce/72262306/

 

[Dragon029]

I remember seeing a RAAF document from late 2014 stating that the current estimate for 3F was September 2017, which was a 1 month creep from the objective of August.

 

[SpudmanWP]

Your dates are fine but the USMC in not likely to update the jet right before it goes overseas on it's first deployment. Besides the gamble that nothing goes wrong, there are training issues for both the pilots & maintainers to consider.


A quick look at the FY2016 budget docs shows the delivery of the Block3F kits coming in Q2 2018.


See Page 17
http://www.dtic.mil/procurement/Y2016/Navy/P40_0592_BSA-1_BA-5_APP-1506N_PB_2016.pdf


btw, Everything from FY2015 jets and on are delivered at Block3F if there are no hangups. This means that the FY2015 that start delivery in Aug 2017 will be Block3F.

 

[Triton]

Your dates are fine but the USMC in not likely to update the jet right before it goes overseas on it's first deployment. Besides the gamble that nothing goes wrong, there are training issues for both the pilots & maintainers to consider.


A quick look at the FY2016 budget docs shows the delivery of the Block3F kits coming in Q2 2018.


See Page 17
http://www.dtic.mil/procurement/Y2016/Navy/P40_0592_BSA-1_BA-5_APP-1506N_PB_2016.pdf


btw, Everything from FY2015 jets and on are delivered at Block3F if there are no hangups. This means that the FY2015 that start delivery in Aug 2017 will be Block3F.

Thank you for checking.

Which criterion got the waiver that could not be met in time?

Source:
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/opinion-why-the-f-35bs-ioc-milestone-matters-415474/

Someone was kind enough to PM me that the waiver was for multi-ship sensor fusion.

 

[Triton]

"F-35 tests fell short, Pentagon report says"
by Zachary Cohen
Updated 2046 GMT (0346 HKT) September 15, 2015

Source:
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/09/15/politics/f-35-report-question-readiness/index.html

CNN)After nearly 15 years of schedule delays and highly criticized cost increases, U.S. military officials and defense contractors confidently proclaimed the much maligned Joint Strike Fighter program back on track when the Marine Corps declared its version of the F-35 fighter jet combat-ready last month.

However, the fifth generation stealth fighter jet may still have a number of maintenance and reliability problems that "are likely to present significant near-term challenges for the Marine Corps," according to a complete copy of a recent memo from the Pentagon's Director of Operational Test and Evaluation (DOT&E), released in a report by the nonpartisan government watchdog group Project on Government Oversight (POGO).

While military officials promoted the F-35's performance during Marine Corps operational test trials aboard the amphibious assault ship USS Wasp in May as a success and proof that the $400 billion fighter is ready for real-world combat deployment, the POGO report tells a very different story.

Not only did the six F-35Bs used in the demonstration, referred to by the Marines as Operational Test 1, fail to achieve the number of required flight hours necessary to be declared combat-ready, but, in fact, the DOT&E found the trials, "did not -- and could not —demonstrate that Block 2B F-35B is operationally effective or suitable for use in any type of limited combat operation, or that it was ready for real-world operational deployments, given the way the event was structured," the report says.

To qualify as a true operational test with results that would allow the Department of Defense to determine whether or not the F-35B is operationally effective and ready to be deployed, testing would have to be conducted under conditions more representative of real-world operations, the report says.

Highlighting artificial advantages present during the USS Wasp trials, such as a relatively empty flight-deck, "non-operationally representative (supply system)workarounds" to support the aircraft's unreliable logistics system and "significant assistance from embarked contractor personnel" to help with maintenance, the report concludes that the flight tests aboard the Navy ship failed to simulate the realistic combat conditions necessary to show whether or not the F-35B is ready for actual deployment.

"This report indicates exactly what some of us have been warning about all along," said Rep. Jackie Speier, D-California, a member of the House Armed Services Committee, and a consistent critic of the F-35 program. "The services are rushing to declare the F-35 ready for combat, ignoring clear readiness issues in order to show that the program is 'back on track,' but just saying something doesn't make it so. The jets currently can't perform many missions in the real world because of mistakes made throughout the development and procurement process," she said.

While the event aboard the USS Wasp did not qualify as a true operational test in the eyes of the DOT&E, the report says the trials did serve as a useful training opportunity for the Marines assigned to F-35B units and highlighted a number of issues, particularly with the aircraft's integration with existing ships and maintenance challenges, that were important to identify before its first deployment.

The Marine Corps said it does not agree with all of the conclusions and opinions outlined by the DOT&E in the POGO report, due to what it called a lack of context and qualifying information, according to a statement provided to CNN.

"During OT-1, we wanted to prove that non-test F-35B aircraft could be operated and sustained aboard an L-class ship," the Marine Corps said in a statement. "We successfully did that. The two weeks of operational testing assessed the aircraft's integration with the U.S. Navy ship and crew, operating a wide array of flight and deck operations."

The Marine Cops also said that the extensive testing done verified expected F-35B capabilities: successful missile shots; successful steel-on-steel, air-to-ground deliveries; and three successful sea-trials.

"At IOC, the F-35B targeted in real time, talked to forward air controllers over the radio and data-link, and put weapons on target. The F-35B can provide close air support in threat environments where our current platforms would not survive, and the synthetic aperture radar gives us a through-the-weather targeting capability where the majority of our legacy targeting systems are simply ineffective," the Marine Corps said.

Despite the fact that the observations outlined by the DOT&E within the POGO report contradict those made by defense contractors and military officials last month, the Marine Corps says F-35B's ability to carry more fuel than the legacy fighters currently in use and weapon payload, coupled with the completion of the installation of Block 3F software on all Marine Corps F-35Bs in the 2017 time frame, means the jet will surpass anything the U.S. has in its arsenal today.

"Data collected and lessons learned during OT-1 will lay the groundwork for F-35B deployments aboard U.S. Navy amphibious carriers now that the U.S. Marine Corps' F-35B Lightning II aircraft reached initial operational capability (IOC) on July 31, 2015," the Marine Corps said.

 

[LowObservable]

The test was called OT - "Operational Test".


Its completion was used by the Commandant to justify a declaration of IOC.


No amount of babbling or idiotic video posts will change these facts.

 

[Triton]

The test was called OT - "Operational Test".


Its completion was used by the Commandant to justify a declaration of IOC.


No amount of babbling or idiotic video posts will change these facts.

Isn't it customary to complete IOT&E testing before declaring IOC?

 

[lastdingo]

It still amazes me how many people (who really ought to know better) continue to think something as complex as the F-35 program could possibly run as smoothly as the local McD's.

You should pay more attention to what many criticize about the F-35 program for real.

The unnecessary degree of complexity, for example. Or it failure to meet earlier claims about dates, quantities, prices, performances - which indicates that the bureaucracy intrested in having the program budget lied early on in order to get the program budget and the contractors who wanted to get the development and (pre-)production orders lied in order to get the turnover and profit.

There were so many 100% fantasy claims (a.k.a. lies) about sortie rates, costs per flying hour etc. by LM and program office that both deserve all criticism that they get.

 

[Dragon029]

The test was called OT - "Operational Test".


Its completion was used by the Commandant to justify a declaration of IOC.


No amount of babbling or idiotic video posts will change these facts.

OT-1; wasn't the ORI the deciding event?

 

[SpudmanWP]

Isn't it customary to complete IOT&E testing before declaring IOC?

Not always as you can see in the (very early 2001) attached pic that IOC happened as SDD was winding down.

 

[Triton]

As of June 2013, it appears that the United States Air Force and United States Navy have dropped completed IOT&E testing from their IOC criteria.

https://www.f35.com/assets/uploads/downloads/12994/f-35_ioc_joint_report_final.pdf

 

[Triton]

Business | Tue Sep 15, 2015 8:03pm EDT
Related: Aerospace & Defense
U.S. Air Force warns F-35 order review could damage program

Source:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/16/us-lockheed-martin-fighter-idUSKCN0RG00120150916

U.S. Air Force Chief of Staff General Mark Welsh on Tuesday warned that short-term moves to revise downward the Air Force's planned purchase of 1,763 Lockheed Martin Corp (LMT.N) F-35 stealth fighters could damage the program and scare off foreign buyers.

"Let’s delay this discussion for a little while until we see what happens in the world," Welsh told reporters at the annual Air Force Association conference, citing efforts by Russia and China to field more advanced fighter aircraft of their own.

"All we do right now is risk damaging a program that's now gaining some momentum and is about to become operational," he said.

Marine Corps General Joseph Dunford, who takes over as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff this month, sparked questions about possible changes to the U.S. military's plans for a total fleet of 2,457 F-35s during his U.S. Senate confirmation hearing. The Pentagon later said no formal review was underway.

Admiral John Richardson, who takes over as chief of naval operations on Friday, also told lawmakers he would take a hard look at the Navy's current requirement for 340 F-35 C-model jets that can take off and land on aircraft carriers.

The F-35 is the Pentagon's largest arms program, with an estimated price tag for development and production of $391 billion over the next five decades.

Lockheed is developing and building three models of the F-35 for the U.S. military and nine countries that have placed orders: Britain, Australia, Italy, Turkey, Norway, the Netherlands, Israel, Japan and South Korea. Canada and Denmark, which helped fund the jet's development, are expected to decide about possible F-35 purchases in coming months.

The Pentagon's F-35 program manager, Air Force Lieutenant General Chris Bogdan, told a separate panel he was determined to keep the jet on track for the Air Force to declare an initial squadron of F-35s ready for combat by Aug. 1, 2016.

Welsh told reporters the program was doing well after years of cost overruns and technical challenges, and it was critical to keep moving toward full production to ensure continued cost reductions. He said the jet was likely to cost about $80 million per plane by 2019, comparable to other fighter jets.

Bogdan told Reuters that none of the services had asked the his office to participate in a reassessment of their overall F-35 procurement plans, and he did not expect them to carry out revisions in the near future.

NATIONAL HARBOR, Md. | By Andrea Shalal