backtop


Print 22 comment(s) - last by monkeyman1140.. on Aug 1 at 3:28 AM


Lockheed Martin F-35B Lightning II   (Source: Lockheed Martin)
Lockheed is trying to determine why the parts are failing at higher than expected rates

The major programs to replacing aging aircraft in the U.S. military fleets in different branches of service are facing some serious issues. The bidding process for the USAF tanker replacement has been fraught with political maneuvering and threats by both parties that are participating with the bidding process.

At the same time, the F-35 Lightning II Fighter program is also underway and is one of the most ambitious aircraft programs to date. The F-35 program is significantly behind schedule in many aspects and the program is seeing its costs overrun projections significantly. The F-35B STOVL fighter broke the sound barrier for the first time in mid-June, which was a significant milestone for the program.

Despite the progress made and the milestones reached, the F-35B STOVL flight tests are significantly behind schedule and the reason for the delays are due to parts that are failing at higher rates than expected. Lockheed Martin CEO Bob Stevens said at an analysts meeting that the systems and demonstration phase of the testing program is so far about 80% complete. 

The parts that are failing on the aircraft causing the delays are not major systems notes Stevens, but smaller components and subsystems. The major issue with the smaller components that are failing is that the repairs require the removal of the engine.

Stevens said, "The components that are failing are more of the things that would appear either smaller or more ordinary like thermal cooling fans, door actuators, selected valves or switches or components of the power system."

The program has 19 test aircraft planned and so far 15 of those have been delivered. Of the planes delivered, only 13 of them are flight capable with the others designed for structural tests. Nine of the flight capable aircraft have together performed 136 test flights reports Defense Tech. The F35-B STOVL version has itself made 74 flights.

There are an additional 31 F-35 aircraft in various stages of completion according to Stevens. Lockheed is working with suppliers to determine the cause of the part failures. The inquiry into the parts failures will determine if the parts need to be redesigned, if the failures are due to manufacturing issues, or if more spare parts are needed for the program.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Fans
By Siphen on 7/29/2010 10:39:43 AM , Rating: 4
Stop using Dell Fans




RE: Fans
By Iridium130m on 7/29/2010 10:54:16 AM , Rating: 5
and Chinese capacitors


RE: Fans
By quiksilvr on 7/29/2010 11:17:21 AM , Rating: 5
Or Apple's magic.


RE: Fans
By grath on 7/29/2010 12:23:56 PM , Rating: 2
James Cameron and Kevin Costner to the rescue!


RE: Fans
By psenechal on 7/29/2010 1:21:29 PM , Rating: 2
We would know if they were using Apple's magic because employees would start jumping off the roof to escape the horrible working conditions =)


RE: Fans
By Drag0nFire on 7/29/2010 5:01:00 PM , Rating: 3
Clearly, they're holding the controls wrong.


RE: Fans
By jonmcc33 on 7/29/2010 5:25:21 PM , Rating: 2
If they install bumpers on the planes then everything will be fine.


Thermal buildup?
By TeXWiller on 7/29/2010 11:15:24 AM , Rating: 3
Mechanical and thermally sensitive components are failing near the engine. Sounds like a thermal buildup caused by the efforts spend on minimizing external thermal signature..




RE: Thermal buildup?
By 91TTZ on 7/29/2010 12:02:44 PM , Rating: 2
You're probably right, but don't worry, they've got that covered. They installed cooling fans to work around that issue. Too bad the cooling fans are failing, too.


RE: Thermal buildup?
By Samus on 7/29/2010 5:03:17 PM , Rating: 2
...sleeve bearing fans, keeps yer cooling systems quiet!


RE: Thermal buildup?
By Amiga500 on 7/29/2010 1:37:18 PM , Rating: 2
I wouldn't agree with that. The thermal signature is dominated mostly by 2 things - being able to see the IR signature of the hot gas from infront of the aircraft, or there being loads of hot gas coming out the rear of the aircraft.

The relatively high bypass ratio of the F-35 is already a good starting point. The shrouded compressor face adds to this.

Carefully aligning stator vane rows for both turbine and compressor helps to reduce signatures transmitting from the combustor.

Beyond that, there is not an awful lot the engineers can do. Heat soak in surrounding components is not really an issue with regards thermal signature - but obviously it is with regards reliability.


Aviation is HARD
By Smilin on 7/29/2010 11:00:49 AM , Rating: 2
I was aviation maintenance in the military. This stuff is HARD.

The complexity of these systems is incredible. Getting a jet into the air again after it's been taken apart for long term maintenance was daunting. I couldn't imagine how hard it would be on a non production plane.




RE: Aviation is HARD
By Amiga500 on 7/29/10, Rating: 0
RE: Aviation is HARD
By Smilin on 7/29/2010 3:29:41 PM , Rating: 3
No, that doesn't help. It's hard by virtue of it's complexity. The inefficiencies and incompetence of the govornment and it's contractors doesn't really have anything to do with it.

Put it this way: A fully functional modern military aircraft that is only a couple years old will fly with *hundreds* of outstanding maintenance issues on it as well as a handful of "grounding" issues that have been signed off on.

An aircraft sitting in the hanger grounded for routine maintenance may have thousands.


RE: Aviation is HARD
By Amiga500 on 7/29/2010 5:20:30 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The inefficiencies and incompetence of the govornment and it's contractors doesn't really have anything to do with it.


Right... 'cos they don't know what design rules to apply for a particular component would have nothing to do with the premature failure of that component.

I see it every day. Hell, I do it myself all too often. Give the job to the wrong people and it will be done wrong. Off-shoring work looks good from the perspective of procurement and accounting - it looks like they save money. Until the stuff does not work right, then loads more money has to be spent fixing it.


Engines
By monkeyman1140 on 8/1/2010 3:28:23 AM , Rating: 2
Well they could always put in as a replacement that 2nd engine that some Senator insisted be built for the F-35 even thought the Pentagon didn't want it.




By DougF on 7/29/2010 3:24:53 PM , Rating: 2
You mean like the Mercury Cougar? (O.K., it's not that bad, but it comes close...)


By Smilin on 7/29/2010 3:32:45 PM , Rating: 2
It is bad design but that's ok. That's kind of the point of spending money to develop this stuff.

They'll either remedy the failure, or improve the maintenance steps.

Dropping an engine is not uncommon either. Depending on the plane it can be done in under an hour or as many as four.


By Reclaimer77 on 7/29/2010 5:00:53 PM , Rating: 4
Or cars that require the entire engine to be pulled because a 10 cent rear main oil seal has failed! That would be crazy!!! hahahaah HAHAHAH !!!!!

Oh wait...we do have those. Nevermind. Carry on with your idiocy.


By JediJeb on 7/31/2010 4:01:59 PM , Rating: 2
The 99 Trans Am I had required the removal of the engine to get to the two rear spark plugs when they needed to be changed. I never changed mine, but a friend spent over $500 at the dealer to get his changed once. Too little engineering gets put into ease of maintenance these days.


By tng on 7/31/2010 8:09:47 PM , Rating: 2
I work for a company that was started by engineers. When something goes into production for the first time the design engineers are the ones that install the machines and when something goes wrong, they have to fix it. They take into account how hard it is to fix and adjust the design accordingly.

Made my life much easier....


"If they're going to pirate somebody, we want it to be us rather than somebody else." -- Microsoft Business Group President Jeff Raikes














botimage
Copyright 2012 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki