Warbird Information Exchange

DISCLAIMER: The views expressed on this site are the responsibility of the poster and do not reflect the views of the management.
It is currently Thu Jun 20, 2013 12:45 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 20 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Maybe no F-35's EH
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2012 12:12 am 
Offline
Air Lord
Air Lord

Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2007 12:36 am
Posts: 7579
Location: Mt. Vernon, WA.
Canadas Ministry of Defense is having a change of heart on buying F-35's as the once 'solid' price is now starting to balloon from the negotiated (but not yet a signed contract) Ca$ 75 Million each to a price not yet found.
This ads to Norway, Turkey, and others starting to back away from the F-35-

_________________
After 40 years in aviation, I find only three reasons to run-
Fire, Free food, If someons yells 'hey, the free food's on fire'


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Maybe no F-35's EH
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2012 7:39 am 
Offline
Air Marshal - 2nd Class
Air Marshal - 2nd Class

Joined: Wed May 05, 2004 3:45 pm
Posts: 1442
Another boondoggle!


Taken from Wiki, (for what it's worth)
"U.S. intends to buy 2443 airframes....." (We'll see. IIRC initial F-22 procurement was to be 700+. Total ended up being 195).

"During testing in 2011, all eight landing tests of the F-35C tail hook failed to catch the arresting wire; the hook design is being modified to address the problem".

Haven't tailhooks been around and working for close to 100 years? They must have "improved" upon it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Maybe no F-35's EH
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2012 10:27 am 
Offline
Air Lord
Air Lord

Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2007 12:36 am
Posts: 7579
Location: Mt. Vernon, WA.
Yeah, but this is the first aircraft LocoWeed has designed for the Navy that needs a tailhook as standard equipment.

_________________
After 40 years in aviation, I find only three reasons to run-
Fire, Free food, If someons yells 'hey, the free food's on fire'


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Maybe no F-35's EH
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:30 am 
Offline
Air Marshal - 2nd Class
Air Marshal - 2nd Class

Joined: Wed May 05, 2004 3:45 pm
Posts: 1442
What about the T2V (T-1A)?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Maybe no F-35's EH
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2012 12:37 pm 
Offline
Air Lord
Air Lord

Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2007 12:36 am
Posts: 7579
Location: Mt. Vernon, WA.
mike furline wrote:
What about the T2V (T-1A)?

Forgot that 'un

_________________
After 40 years in aviation, I find only three reasons to run-
Fire, Free food, If someons yells 'hey, the free food's on fire'


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Maybe no F-35's EH
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2012 1:59 pm 
Offline
Group Captain
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 11, 2009 11:36 am
Posts: 353
Location: Atlanta
S-3 Viking? Lockheed.......

_________________
Cheers!

Lance Jones


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Maybe no F-35's EH
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2012 3:58 pm 
Offline
Air Marshall - 1st Class
Air Marshall - 1st Class
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 12:22 am
Posts: 534
Location: Tampa, Florida
I'm still mad at the few F-22's they made, which was/is a all around better fighter than the F-35

_________________
My racing will fund my warbirding. Hopefully...

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/#!/ChristopherDeshongRacing
Twitter: https://twitter.com/ChrisDRacing


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Maybe no F-35's EH
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2012 4:44 pm 
Offline
Air Marshall - 1st Class
Air Marshall - 1st Class

Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2007 7:43 pm
Posts: 551
Location: Marietta, GA
Directly or indirectly, Lockheed has paid for a lot of my existance, so I'm a big fan of their programs. However, this program smelled like a boondoggle from day one. Trying to use variants of one airframe to fill three substantially different requirements is a recipe for a mess.

I hope they get things worked out.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Maybe no F-35's EH
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2012 4:45 pm 
Offline
Air Marshal - 3rd Class
Air Marshal - 3rd Class

Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 10:16 am
Posts: 1726
mike furline wrote:
"During testing in 2011, all eight landing tests of the F-35C tail hook failed to catch the arresting wire; the hook design is being modified to address the problem".

Haven't tailhooks been around and working for close to 100 years? They must have "improved" upon it.

It's too close to the mains, there isn't any sufficient structure far enough back to mount it where it needs to be....

_________________
Those who possess real knowledge are rare.

Those who can set that knowledge into motion in the physical world are rarer still.

The few who possess real knowledge and can set it into motion of their own hands are the rarest of all.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Maybe no F-35's EH
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2012 9:58 pm 
Offline
Air Lord
Air Lord

Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2007 12:36 am
Posts: 7579
Location: Mt. Vernon, WA.
ZRX61 wrote:
mike furline wrote:
"During testing in 2011, all eight landing tests of the F-35C tail hook failed to catch the arresting wire; the hook design is being modified to address the problem".

Haven't tailhooks been around and working for close to 100 years? They must have "improved" upon it.

It's too close to the mains, there isn't any sufficient structure far enough back to mount it where it needs to be....

Once again, Locoweed engineering rushs to the cutting edge carrying a butter knife. pop2

_________________
After 40 years in aviation, I find only three reasons to run-
Fire, Free food, If someons yells 'hey, the free food's on fire'


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Maybe no F-35's EH
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2012 10:20 pm 
Offline
Air Marshall - 1st Class
Air Marshall - 1st Class
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2006 7:18 pm
Posts: 657
Location: Meriden,Ct.
We don’t need no stinking tail hook, just make them all STOVL ! :wink:

Actually I don’t we could make all the engines here at Pratt anyway.

From what I’ve heard we were going to make the US engines here in Ct. and the foreign engines would be made in Fl. by our sister company Rocketdyne, since they not making too many Shuttle engines anymore.

Phil

_________________
A man has to know his limitations.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Maybe no F-35's EH
PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2012 8:34 am 
Offline
Air Marshall - 1st Class
Air Marshall - 1st Class
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 8:41 pm
Posts: 969
Location: North Texas
ZRX61 wrote:
It's too close to the mains, there isn't any sufficient structure far enough back to mount it where it needs to be....



Actually, the hook location is not causing the problem that showed up in the trample testing. The Navy's desired toe shaping coupled with a hook damper that was wan't strong enough caused the problem. A while back the Navy revised it's hook toe design requirements to reduce the potential and instances of the hook cutting the deck pendants. The as designed toe profile just didn't work for the required hook angle. Revisng the toe profile combined with a new damper should solve the problem. It's supposed to start testing late this summer. There is a long discussion on hook engineering and the requirements over on F-16.net in the F-35 section if one is curious.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Maybe no F-35's EH
PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2012 4:30 pm 
Offline
Air Marshall - 1st Class
Air Marshall - 1st Class

Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2007 7:43 pm
Posts: 551
Location: Marietta, GA
Cvairwerks wrote:
ZRX61 wrote:
It's too close to the mains, there isn't any sufficient structure far enough back to mount it where it needs to be....



Actually, the hook location is not causing the problem that showed up in the trample testing. The Navy's desired toe shaping coupled with a hook damper that was wan't strong enough caused the problem. A while back the Navy revised it's hook toe design requirements to reduce the potential and instances of the hook cutting the deck pendants. The as designed toe profile just didn't work for the required hook angle. Revisng the toe profile combined with a new damper should solve the problem. It's supposed to start testing late this summer. There is a long discussion on hook engineering and the requirements over on F-16.net in the F-35 section if one is curious.


It is always interesting when you get the facts behind the story. I doubt that the facts and the solution (presuming it works) get 1/10th the press that the problem did.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Maybe no F-35's EH
PostPosted: Sun Mar 18, 2012 6:05 pm 
Offline
Air Lord
Air Lord

Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2007 12:36 am
Posts: 7579
Location: Mt. Vernon, WA.
I'm still curious about what will be the result of the first one to FRISBEE that forward lift fan- :roll:

_________________
After 40 years in aviation, I find only three reasons to run-
Fire, Free food, If someons yells 'hey, the free food's on fire'


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Maybe no F-35's EH
PostPosted: Sun Apr 01, 2012 7:30 am 
Offline
Corporal

Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 12:08 pm
Posts: 10
I'm shocked. How can this happen to a company that holds an AS9100C registration? I'm certain LM has buckets of metrics that inform management everything is fine. I'm equally certain that all the engineers on the program are current with their diversity and harassment in the work place training requirements.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 20 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group