Posted on 09/07/2011 6:49:42 PM PDT by PilotDave
Just weeks after the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter got back to flight testing, a new design problem has cropped up. An aluminum beam in the wing structure has been found to be "defective," an issue that could lower the aircraft's wing life from 8,000 hours, or about 25 operational years, to just 1,200 hours, which equates to about five years of flying.
(Excerpt) Read more at aero-news.net ...
At least it is supplying jobs.
Can a new structural crack suggest F-35 is healthier?When an aluminium alloy bulkhead inside the Lockheed Martin F-35B cracked last year after just 1,600h of durability tests, the programme was caught by surprise. Lockheed's analysis had not predicted the 496 bulkhead would buckle before the end of the 16,000h-long durability exam.
A year later, the programme claims to have made some progress.
Unfortunately the airframe structure is still not immune from early cracking, but this time Lockheed was not caught by surprise.
Lockheed's analysis predicted root rib forgings in each wing for the F-35A and F-35B also would fail, and they actually survived slightly longer than expected, the programme office says. The root rib actually succumbed after about 2,800h of the 16,000h durability test. Lockheed had already designed a fix to install in the next lot of low-rate initial production (LRIP).
The last F-22 was made today
This problem just made the F-35 about the most expensive per flight hour aircraft in the world.
This problem just made the F-35 about the most expensive per flight hour aircraft in the world.
“The last F-22 was made today”
A sad day.
Reason number 8942 to hate Obama.
If the F-35 has to fix these serious structure problems within their current budget the program is doomed. Thus, America will have basically no 5th gen fighters. That, along with no manned space program leaves us roughly equal to haiti in the aerospace world.
Not quite. You should actually read the article.
They need to cancel this program. There is no documented threat that this aircraft counters that is not already dealt with currently.
Stealing a quote from Joel Goodson: “Looks like the F/A-18E/F!”
is this problem for all variants?
And so the F-35 continues to flawlessly mimic the F-111 program.
We should cancel it now. Just drive a stake through it and be done, because we’re just throwing good money after bad.
And what exactly do you replace it with? The programmes which resulted in the F-15 and A-10 ran concurrent to the F-111 while Grumman also worked on the F-14. The only ‘alternatives’ now are older systems.
“This problem just made the F-35 about the most expensive per flight hour aircraft in the world.”
Stupid assertion as that data isn’t even in existence yet!
JC
“They need to cancel this program. There is no documented threat that this aircraft counters that is not already dealt with currently.”
You got any evidence to back that up Biggie? Thought not, just running your mouth, eh?
JC
“And so the F-35 continues to flawlessly mimic the F-111 program.”
Kinda shows your ignorance of the F-35 program, eh? (Are you a PO’d loser Boeing employee?)
JC
No, it shows my disgust as a taxpayer.
First, what “need” does the F-35 fulfill? So far as I can see, it is a platform designed to fulfill political needs first, tactical combat operations second.
Why was or is there a need to create a joint-role platform with other countries? Their command and control infrastructure cannot keep up with ours, so I see no reason under the sun to hamper or distort *our* requirements to deal with those of our “allies.” I put that word in quotes, because if a real shooting war ever breaks out, we’ll find out just what we’ve found out in Iraq and Afghanistan - they’re ‘allies’ in the sense that they’ll hold our coats and offer ‘constructive advice’ from the sidelines.
Second, we’ve learned the hard way with the F-111 that multi-role aircraft usually either suck, or they become exorbitantly expensive.
In that light, why would we want to replace the F-35 with anything like it? Let’s drop the mental masturbation of allowing our “allies” to set any specifications on OUR fighter aircraft and build what WE need.
What specifications did the allies set on the JSF so as to affect its likely performance? The JSF was and remains primarily a US programme with industrial participation for allies.
The F-111 was not meant to be a multi-role aircraft-it was adapted later to a naval role at which it sucked. But it did more than a decent job in the strike and electronic warfare roles.
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.