As a small kid I remember watching The Undersea World of Jacques Cousteau on TV. The episode about Truk Harbor in the Pacific with all the sunken Japanese ships that divers could look at was amazing as can be seen from this clip.
Take a look at these photos of some of the air strikes that put those ships on the bottom back in 1944.
A few months back the F-35 test program was grounded due to a mid-air event that required a test aircraft to land right away,
Two generators attached to the aircraft’s jet engine failed. The cause as reported by Aviation Week was that there was an oiling procedure that was not to spec. Also reported was that this problem affected generators on newer test aircraft and not some of the old ones and that there was a design fix in the works.
The statement says: “Previous maintenance procedures could allow a small amount of extra oil to remain within the generator following servicing. Under some conditions, the extra oil that is churning inside a narrow air gap within the AES/G could cause internal temperatures to increase. It was assessed that high temperatures led to the generator failures.”
Soon after the incident it was determined that only those aircraft with the newer AES/G design were affected. Those with the earlier engine starter/generator (ES/G) — F-35A CTOL test jets AF-1/2/3 and F-35B STOVL test jets BF-1/2/3/4 — were returned to flight on March 14. This latest action clears those with the AES/G — AF-4, BF-5, F-35C CV test jet CF-1 and the first two low-rate initial production aircraft AF-6 and 7.
As for any effect on an already-delayed flight test program, the JPO says: “There was no significant impact to the System Development and Demonstration (SDD) program or production operations. Flight test schedules are built with a margin for precautionary safety stand-downs. The F-35 test programs at Edwards AFB, Calif. and Naval Air Station Patuxent River, MD remain ahead of their monthly flight test schedules.”
Bill Sweetman gives you an overview of the systems here and also mentions that DOD/Navair went out to small business last year to help find a more robust solution for electrical system problems.
There are efforts under way to improve the system. Navair issued a small business innovation research solicitation in August calling for more robust controls, and Graham Warwick has reported on the USAF’s Invent program, which is looking at a more thermally efficient hybrid architecture for stealthy aircraft.
So how will oiling be fixed? Well, here is another request from DOD asking small business for help with the oil system of the Pratt and Whitney F135 engine. (PDF file)
Something to think about when we hear more great platitudes about the F-35 program from the usual suspects. Yet more evidence that the aircraft’s design is not stable and there can be no great learning curve gained in production. Lots of engineering changes ahead. It may have a fresh coat of paint and make pretty pictures and videos, but there is still a lot of work to do. Buyer beware.
Hmmm… not such a good idea. This will most likely be a one-way street.
Australia to boost military ties with China
Then there is this.
US Says China Backsliding on Human Rights
Tibetan monastery faceoff nears crisis point
This is what happens when you don’t contain communists. Too late now. The U.S. owes big money and Australia makes big GDP from stuff it digs up out of the ground and sells to China.
I love it how people like this are all for U.S. military intervention–that is what he is saying because an unhappy letter from the U.N. or Hillary won’t do it–and then never have day one of military service under their belt. I’ll say it. I don’t care what happens in Syria. We have real nation-building to do at home. And I don’t want a no-nothing career politician trying to add to the work of Team America: WORLD POLICE.
If you know people like this and are tired of this kind of behavior, just point the person to the nearest military recruiter and see if they are willing to do their part. Chances are, they will have an excuse of some kind.
If the President is allowed to make a silly pick for Gate’s replacement (Panetta), I think I can too.
My pick has energy to do the job; has a good team; and by almost all the words of this video, understands the mission of Secretary of Defense. The words are on-message. As a bonus at the end of this video, my pick leads by example and tells you how he will cut costs on the road show.
Energy; the right words; a good team; and understands being frugal.
Panetta will be looking for places to sneak naps. My pick won’t.
Everybody; get in line…
Revamped F-15s meeting our needs and hey, there isn’t much to worry about? Interesting theory, but here are a few thoughts.
“…detect stealthy targets such as the J-20 at long range.”
A few things. These radars reside around X-band. Most stealth designs are their best reducing the effectiveness of radars in…X-band/Ku Band.
Good point about radar size and power aperture, however there is still that frequency band issue. Of interest; in the small aperture category of AESA’s the Supers APG-79 has a bit of an edge on the F-35 APG-81.
More, our single point of failure is the AMRAAM which has a probability of kill (PK) vs poor targets of around 50 percent.
Add an aircraft that can jam that down (SU-3x etc) and you get down to a PK that is dangerously low. Put the AMRAAM against a threat with nose-on low observable and a terminal radar seeker on the missile won’t be good enough. What we need is an AMRAAM with an AIM-9X head.
The Japanese Eagles probably have the best IR detection on their F-15s jets right on top of the nose. A good low drag solution compared to other add-on thoughts for the Eagles. IR detection is needed to properly go against PAK-FA/J-2x.
RU-tech is also working on L-band sensors in the wing leading edge. This lower band has a better chance of detecting stealth aircraft. Certainly, “affordable-export-friendly” narrow band stealth like the F-35. These L-band sensors will start showing up on big SUs and PAK-FAs of the future. Combined with their IR sensors, something to think about.
No matter what you do with the F-15, it does not have the extreme super-cruise and high altitude of the F-22. This produces lower (less effective) no-escape-zone (NEZ) solutions for weapons vs. the F-22.
As for sensors on the F-22, one must understand how the AN/ALR-94 connected to 30-some apertures on the airframe produces a passive threat picture; and how that information is coordinated with the APG-77.
The reference red threat is now the F-22 for determining our needs against future bad guys.
When a customized F-15 with big AESA and a low drag IR detector a la the Japanese Eagles performs several combat exercises vs. the F22, that is the rate of success you will have against the PAK-FA/J-2x. Most likely this means: not enough beef.
F-15 Strike Eagles were designed from the outset to have 12,000k flight hours for the airframe life right off the show room floor. Remember its roots that were originally for a low level penetration (dense air) and carrying heavy loads vs the F-15A-D “not a pound for air-to-ground”. Visit the depot at Robins Air Force Base, Georgia to have a full picture of F-15 sustainment.
F-22 with F-15 will (and does in exercises) work well at clearing the board of legacy threats. I would not get all excited about the F-15 facing future threats. And also, those future threats include being near surface-to-air S-300, S-400 and similar.
F-15Es will always be useful as long as “a man has got to know his limitations” process is followed.
In thinking of ideas to cut the military, it is pretty much a given that we are top heavy in flag-ranks. I find it hard to believe that all of them are needed or that all of them are gainfully employed.
This is a pretty impressive bit of reading about illegal killings in Afghanistan. I guess one would have to be there to fully understand, yet one wonders what the Company commander and top NCO were doing.
H/T- War News Updates
Assuming the noise we hear that Panetta is going to replace Gates is true. Here are a few thoughts of why I don’t like the idea.
1. He is too old. He will be 73 in June. You need someone with energy given all the activity and globe-trotting involved with the job.
2. It is difficult to believe that the Obama administration did a serious study on this topic. There is talent out there for this position. Even when you consider some of the people I am not the biggest fans of like Robert Work, they would be far more useful than Mr. Panetta. Again, the available talent pool has not been explored for such an important job.
3. Mr. Panetta is a lawyer. We need someone that is a strategic thinker and not a lawyer. Gates at least offered that much. Historically, when in doubt, lawyers always fall back on this skill even when it isn’t relevant to the leadership problem at hand.
4. Mr. Panetta is more politician than anything else. For the job of DOD boss, that is also a problem.
At least Mr. Panetta wore the uniform of the United States Army for a while. That is a thin complement but it might help.
Maybe he will surprise me.
“Every dollar spent on excess overhead or unneeded programs — such as the
extra engine for the[Joint Strike Fighter] — is a dollar not available to support our troops and prepare for threats on the horizon.”
Fixed it for you Mr. Gates.
But hey! New news. Word is Panetta will replace him.
From bad to worse.
