F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

[SW1]

https://www.defensenews.com/air/2022/12 ... as-runway/

The JPO would not say what caused the grounded F-35s to be deemed at a higher risk.
A source familiar with the program, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss details of the incident, said the JPO’s initial assessment found that a propulsion system issue led to the Dec. 15 crash of the hovering F-35B, which has now led to broader groundings in the fleet.

The source said that, in guidance to the services, the JPO said a failure of a tube used to transfer high-pressure fuel in the fighter’s F135 engine prompted the office to update its safety risk assessments.

The JPO also told the services that jets with fewer than 40 hours of flying are affected, this source said.

Though the JPO would not say exactly how many F-35s were grounded, it confirmed the grounded jets include all three variants. Some of those grounded F-35s are American fighters.

The news site Times of Israel on Sunday reported the Israeli Air Force had grounded 11 of its F-35s due to the incident, and that they would be checked for similar issues. Israel flies the F-35I, which is based on the F-35A.

[sunstersun]

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/f ... initiative

APG-85.

[mrclark303]

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/f ... initiative

APG-85.

It suggests structural changes to the forward fuselage with block 4, I wonder if they are going with a swash plate antenna like Captor E allowing a much broader radar picture?

Where does that leave the UK, a two tier fleet again!

[tomuk]

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/f ... initiative

APG-85.

It suggests structural changes to the forward fuselage with block 4, I wonder if they are going with a swash plate antenna like Captor E allowing a much broader radar picture?

Where does that leave the UK, a two tier fleet again!

What structural changes? As regars a two tier fleet this was always going to be the case being a Tier 1 partner meant we were committed to early builds. There is a big upgrade cost to some of our earlier F35s to upgrade them with the initial 3 or 4 unupgradable.

[mrclark303]

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/f ... initiative

APG-85.

It suggests structural changes to the forward fuselage with block 4, I wonder if they are going with a swash plate antenna like Captor E allowing a much broader radar picture?

Where does that leave the UK, a two tier fleet again!

What structural changes? As regars a two tier fleet this was always going to be the case being a Tier 1 partner meant we were committed to early builds. There is a big upgrade cost to some of our earlier F35s to upgrade them with the initial 3 or 4 unupgradable.

Hi Tom, the new Radar that's not backwards compatible with Block 3 jets, suggests a modified forward fuselage, unless I am miss reading the report?

[mrclark303]

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/f ... initiative

APG-85.

It suggests structural changes to the forward fuselage with block 4, I wonder if they are going with a swash plate antenna like Captor E allowing a much broader radar picture?

Where does that leave the UK, a two tier fleet again!

What structural changes? As regars a two tier fleet this was always going to be the case being a Tier 1 partner meant we were committed to early builds. There is a big upgrade cost to some of our earlier F35s to upgrade them with the initial 3 or 4 unupgradable.

Hi Tom, the new Radar that's not backwards compatible with Block 3 jets, suggests a modified forward fuselage, unless I am miss reading the report?

It's interesting that the original designers of the radar and it's AESA thought that the array itself wouldn't require change, just swapped out blackboxes to counter obsolescence and embrace new technology as it comes along.

My understanding is that there has been somewhat of a revolution in the technology utilised in the individual transmit/ receive modules that make up the array in the past few years, probably forcing a rethink in the F35 project office.

[tomuk]

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/f ... initiative

APG-85.

It suggests structural changes to the forward fuselage with block 4, I wonder if they are going with a swash plate antenna like Captor E allowing a much broader radar picture?

Where does that leave the UK, a two tier fleet again!

What structural changes? As regars a two tier fleet this was always going to be the case being a Tier 1 partner meant we were committed to early builds. There is a big upgrade cost to some of our earlier F35s to upgrade them with the initial 3 or 4 unupgradable.

Hi Tom, the new Radar that's not backwards compatible with Block 3 jets, suggests a modified forward fuselage, unless I am miss reading the report?

It's interesting that the original designers of the radar and it's AESA thought that the array itself wouldn't require change, just swapped out blackboxes to counter obsolescence and embrace new technology as it comes along.

My understanding is that there has been somewhat of a revolution in the technology utilised in the individual transmit/ receive modules that make up the array in the past few years, probably forcing a rethink in the F35 project office.

The current radar has GAA Gallium Arsenide TR modules the latest tech is GAN Gallium Nitride which is much more resistant to heat and voltage and has better SNR so you can drive the radar a lot harder but you ned more cooling, power supplies and more computing power to cope with the extra radar data.

It is these combined requirements that make it incompatible with earlier jets not so much a specific structural issue. This is pretty much similar to the Tranches of Typhoon and the versions of the ECR radar.

As to why the program office thought the array didn't need changing this is probably just sales b/s and bragging as the array was one of the biggest on introduction but GAN TR modules were always on the horizon.

[dmereifield]

Canada just joined the club....88 x F-35A

[dmereifield]

Until they pull out again...

[SKB]

Wrong F-35, wrong country, wrong thread.... *sigh*

[downsizer]

Wrong F-35, wrong country, wrong thread.... *sigh*

Constructive and helpful input as always.

[SW1]

How many years has it been in the making to come to the conclusion they first thought off.

Though I suspect when they bailed first time round they were intending super hornet that is until Boeing played dirty tricks on bombardier and become a toxic brand.

[serge750]

How many years has it been in the making to come to the conclusion they first thought off.

Though I suspect when they bailed first time round they were intending super hornet that is until Boeing played dirty tricks on bombardier and become a toxic brand.

You are generous thinking they had a plan after the first cancellation. Remember these are politicians.

[Ron5]

Odds of Canada getting their 88 before the UK gets 60?

[Halidon]

How many years has it been in the making to come to the conclusion they first thought off.

Though I suspect when they bailed first time round they were intending super hornet that is until Boeing played dirty tricks on bombardier and become a toxic brand.

This was exactly the plan, they were all set for Super Hornets to "win" when the Bombardier saga went down and Boeing became political poison. They more or less spent the last few years trying to squeeze the best deal out of LM they could, and amassing a hoard of "No, really, we need F-35" and "see, it really does work" data to convince the locals.

[Scimitar54]

SKB Wrote:-

Wrong F-35, wrong country, wrong thread.... *sigh* :roll

:

Unless just maybe some of the “88” end up being changed to F-35B, for deployment on USN LHD’s or RN QEC Carriers.

[sol]

F-35 Tranche 2 confirmed, 74 planes till 2033 in three frontline squadrons. 809 NAS expected to stand up this year. Meteor and SPEAR 3 on F-35 expected by 2028, OUT date moved from 2049 to 2069.

[Ron5]

F-35 Tranche 2 confirmed, 74 planes till 2033 in three frontline squadrons. 809 NAS expected to stand up this year. Meteor and SPEAR 3 on F-35 expected by 2028, OUT date moved from 2049 to 2069.

Tranche 2 "confirmed" is a bit of a stretch. But good news that a budget has been identified. I wonder if it's robust enough to handle inflation.

There will not be additional A400's.

[SKB]

15th December 2022:

[Ron5]

I thought this was old news. A bad part that has to be replaced in a few F-35B. They're grounded until that happens. As far as I know, none of the UK aircraft are impacted.

[bobp]

I thought this was old news. A bad part that has to be replaced in a few F-35B. They're grounded until that happens. As far as I know, none of the UK aircraft are impacted.

Yes you are right Ron this is old news from last year.

[bobp]

Pretty decent video about the F35B engineering......

[Ron5]

Excellent video Thanks Bob.

[sunstersun]

[sunstersun]

https://breakingdefense.com/2023/03/air ... ontractor/

Keeps the Pratt engine.

Convenient for all international partners.