Sign in to follow this  
Ease the sheet.

f35 susceptible to rust?

Recommended Posts

It's going to be interesting for the Navy F35's. Maybe they can keep them in special baggies for the 95% of the time they aren't actually functional.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hear it has the same paint problems as the Honda Ridgeline...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How does the rust even know where the F35 is?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Olsonist said:

How does the rust even know where the F35 is?

Rust never sleeps.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ishmael said:

Rust never sleeps.

Oh you mean like Jeff when he's over at Meli's.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Olsonist said:

Oh you mean like Jeff when he's over at Meli's.

Rust doesn't snore.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No.......... F-35s don't rust, they just fade away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Should have them TruCoated at the factory.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ease the sheet. said:

The newish 7050  and 7085 aluminum alloys are susceptible to intergranular corrosion or more specifically exfoliation corrosion or EXCO.

The corrosion resistance is related to the copper content. The maximum fracture toughness is reached with about 1.4% Cu  content. The corrosion resistance is not sever ar that level. The f35 7085 is alloyed with certain rare earth metals to minimize the problem along with other treatments. 

  • Downvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

The newish 7050  and 7085 aluminum alloys are susceptible to intergranular corrosion or more specifically exfoliation corrosion or EXCO.

The corrosion resistance is related to the copper content. The maximum fracture toughness is reached with about 1.4% Cu  content. The corrosion resistance is not sever ar that level. The f35 7085 is alloyed with certain rare earth metals to minimize the problem along with other treatments. 

Rust baby. It’s what happens when you design by committee. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Susceptible" is one of those words most engineers would rather avoid being used to describe their product.

You don't hear that word used to describe desirable outcomes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not a big problem, the new bomb racks have room for some zinc anodes.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spray the damn things with Rustoleum and call it good. Boeing would approve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, kent_island_sailor said:

Boeing has a fix for that.  (not a joke, I have sprayed this on airplanes and other stuff)

boeshield-car-fluids-chemicals-t90012-64

I have a couple of cans and a gallon jug of it downstairs. It's great where you can't reach because it will creep there, or so they say. I've seen some evidence of it.

But if you can reach/see the area in need of protection, LPS3 is better.

My new fav is Fluid Film. Almost as good as the LPS at making a protective film that lasts past one dunking but smells better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meh, what's a little surface rust?  Nothing a little bondo and some buffing can't fix.

As long as the front doesn't fall off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will go down in history as the Alfa Romeo/Fiat of jet fighters. "Great performance, but the bastard started rusting away within six months."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Happy said:

Will go down in history as the Alfa Romeo/Fiat of jet fighters. "Great performance, but the bastard started rusting away within six months."

The marines F-35B's have been at sea for some time. If this was a problem they would know first. 

Some pencil dick in Australia seeking attention by solving  problems that don't currently exists and likely won't.

For arguments sake if Oz buys and install these suggested dehumidifiers and there is no corrosion was it because this genius nipped it in the bud or because there was never a problem to begin with? 

Reminds me of Global Warming. In 2100 when the Earth is not scorched or flooded and the COlevels are at the high end of the prediction curves, the loony lefties will claim all their UN reports and non complied with treaties saved the day. 

Same mentality at work. Think of it this way. An engineer can solve a real problem and risk having their solution fail the test or they could fabricate a hypothetical non-problem where their proposed solution is all but guaranteed to work. 

I was engineering a self supporting circularly polarized helical antenna and our local prophylactic engineer came by and started arguing that it needed a delrin tube pyramid supporting the top of the antenna because he calculated my design would suffer permanent deformation at 11 lateral G's. He even persisted when it was pointed out that the satellite fails at 9 and the rocket at even  less than that.

  • Downvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Happy said:

Will go down in history as the Alfa Romeo/Fiat of jet fighters. "Great Mediocre performance, but the bastard started rusting away within six months."

Could likely be outperformed by dropping Fiat 500's on the perps from a great height.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

The marines F-35B's have been at sea for some time. If this was a problem they would know first. 

Some pencil dick in Australia seeking attention by solving  problems that don't currently exists and likely won't.

For arguments sake if Oz buys and install these suggested dehumidifiers and there is no corrosion was it because this genius nipped it in the bud or because there was never a problem to begin with? 

Reminds me of Global Warming. In 2100 when the Earth is not scorched or flooded and the COlevels are at the high end of the prediction curves, the loony lefties will claim all their UN reports and non complied with treaties saved the day. 

Same mentality at work. Think of it this way. An engineer can solve a real problem and risk having their solution fail the test or they could fabricate a hypothetical non-problem where their proposed solution is all but guaranteed to work. 

I was engineering a self supporting circularly polarized helical antenna and our local prophylactic engineer came by and started arguing that it needed a delrin tube pyramid supporting the top of the antenna because he calculated my design would suffer permanent deformation at 11 lateral G's. He even persisted when it was pointed out that the satellite fails at 9 and the rocket at even  less than that.

You're an idiot.

It's well known proplem caused by atmospheric conditions specific to certain localities.

It also been documented in Australia on Blackhawk helicopters.

 

Did I say you're an idiot? With a pencil dick?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Ease the sheet. said:

You're an idiot.

It's well known proplem caused by atmospheric conditions specific to certain localities.

It also been documented in Australia on Blackhawk helicopters.

 

Did I say you're an idiot? With a pencil dick?

 

Corrosion is a problem on everything. Every aircraft ever built has a corrosion problem. Boats put zinc anodes in the water to "SLOW" the process. I have never seen a material that can't be corroded.  The F-22 has corrosion issues as do the F-15-16,18 etc. 

You manage corrosion you don't eliminate it.  

Like every anti F-35 thread  this one tries to argue this is a flaw in the F-35 rather than a maintenance issue similar to issues every other plane experiences. 

Fake story Fake thread fake arguments

The unwash may fall for your BS but I'm niot the unwashed. 

  • Downvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

Corrosion is a problem on everything. Every aircraft ever built has a corrosion problem. Boats put zinc anodes in the water to "SLOW" the process. I have never seen a material that can't be corroded.  The F-22 has corrosion issues as do the F-15-16,18 etc. 

You manage corrosion you don't eliminate it.  

Like every anti F-35 thread  this one tries to argue this is a flaw in the F-35 rather than a maintenance issue similar to issues every other plane experiences. 

Fake story Fake thread fake arguments

The unwash may fall for your BS but I'm niot the unwashed. 

Sadly, I never owned a new airplane but I assume that the limited corrosion on mine was the result of 20+ yrs age.  To even the field, how are the 20yr old F35s looking?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

Corrosion is a problem on everything. Every aircraft ever built has a corrosion problem. Boats put zinc anodes in the water to "SLOW" the process. I have never seen a material that can't be corroded.  The F-22 has corrosion issues as do the F-15-16,18 etc. 

You manage corrosion you don't eliminate it.  

Like every anti F-35 thread  this one tries to argue this is a flaw in the F-35 rather than a maintenance issue similar to issues every other plane experiences. 

Fake story Fake thread fake arguments

The unwash may fall for your BS but I'm niot the unwashed. 

You've never seen a material that can't be corroded?

Really?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Cal20sailor said:

Sadly, I never owned a new airplane but I assume that the limited corrosion on mine was the result of 20+ yrs age.  To even the field, how are the 20yr old F35s looking?

 

I wonder if you realize this is a hypothetical problem that was raised a year before Australia received their first plane. 

The aluminum in the F35 as in every plane I am aware of is treated to minimize corrosion. The F-35 is no different. Both the navy and Marine jets need to be secure in a high salt, high humidity environment.  

This is a lot like the F35B will melt the flight deck. 

Keep throwing shade on the F-35 and it will keep making you look stupid. 

 

 

  • Downvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

I wonder if you realize this is a hypothetical problem that was raised a year before Australia received their first plane. 

The aluminum in the F35 as in every plane I am aware of is treated to minimize corrosion. The F-35 is no different. Both the navy and Marine jets need to be secure in a high salt, high humidity environment.  

This is a lot like the F35B will melt the flight deck. 

Keep throwing shade on the F-35 and it will keep making you look stupid. 

 

 

It's not a hypothetical problem. It's real.

And the navy/marine environment is different to the specific environment where this problem does exist.

Your rush to defend the F-35 without knowing about this particular rust issue is more proof of empty vessels making noises.

And don't be afraid of posting those photos of rusting tire rubber on planes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

I wonder if you realize this is a hypothetical problem that was raised a year before Australia received their first plane. 

The aluminum in the F35 as in every plane I am aware of is treated to minimize corrosion. The F-35 is no different. Both the navy and Marine jets need to be secure in a high salt, high humidity environment.  

This is a lot like the F35B will melt the flight deck. 

Keep throwing shade on the F-35 and it will keep making you look stupid. 

 

 

You have no life.  Somewhere I stated that I only do this to jerk you around because anyone with a brain should be able to discuss issues, not throw a weapon down our throats.  That and blind loyalty to what you call the President.  You're wrong but hang in there, we're going to be enough for a really good fire.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Ease the sheet. said:

You've never seen a material that can't be corroded?

Really?

It’s true.  All those carbon fiber spars and boats rust like a motherfucker.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Ease the sheet. said:

You've never seen a material that can't be corroded?

Really?

image.jpeg.30c9d0b72dff038ffe2064e27e469d87.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Ease the sheet. said:

It's not a hypothetical problem. It's real.

And the navy/marine environment is different to the specific environment where this problem does exist.

Your rush to defend the F-35 without knowing about this particular rust issue is more proof of empty vessels making noises.

And don't be afraid of posting those photos of rusting tire rubber on planes

It is the field I work in. So explain why this air base is unique and worse than that an F-35 on the flight deck or a carrier exposed to salt mist 24/7?

 

  • Downvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

It is the field I work in. So explain why this air base is unique and worse than that an F-35 on the flight deck or a carrier exposed to salt mist 24/7?

 

A second ago you said you were designing antennas.  The guy who designs antennas doesn't know shit about aluminum alloys.  I do as I was a pilot in my spare time.  You are a lying cocksucker...we knew the cocksucker part. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And if you were designing antennas you would know the Lincoln Lab guys.  You sir are a fake.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Cal20sailor said:

A second ago you said you were designing antennas.  The guy who designs antennas doesn't know shit about aluminum alloys.  I do as I was a pilot in my spare time.  You are a lying cocksucker...we knew the cocksucker part. 

Well, to be fair, we knew about the lying part too.

No-one believes a word he says in regards to his "engineering experience" ever since he fucked up his MIT "attendance". And that's without those who tracked him down outing who he is and what he does (they just laugh a little harder when he tries embellishing his record).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

It is the field I work in. So explain why this air base is unique and worse than that an F-35 on the flight deck or a carrier exposed to salt mist 24/7?

 

What? No photos?

A number of airbases have specific conditions of high humidity and low air movement. A carrier at 25kn doesn't have low air movement.

 

 

On 5/7/2019 at 12:20 PM, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

The newish 7050  and 7085 aluminum alloys are susceptible to intergranular corrosion or more specifically exfoliation corrosion or EXCO.

The corrosion resistance is related to the copper content. The maximum fracture toughness is reached with about 1.4% Cu  content. The corrosion resistance is not sever ar that level. The f35 7085 is alloyed with certain rare earth metals to minimize the problem along with other treatments. 

So you agree the alloy used in the F-35 is susceptible to rust.

 

Btw exco is way more worse than intergranular corrosion. Thanks for correcting me on the seriousness of the problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Cal20sailor said:

A second ago you said you were designing antennas.  The guy who designs antennas doesn't know shit about aluminum alloys.  I do as I was a pilot in my spare time.  You are a lying cocksucker...we knew the cocksucker part. 

Aerospace Engineering MIT. Prior education and experience in computer science and electronic engineering. 

A cross disciplinarian. 

Mechanical design
Propulsion (rockets not jets)
Space systems,  environmental testing of satellites, and integration
power systems, especially solar on satellites
Analog, RF and digital design  (also an amateur Extra Class) 
Software design at the system level. Language compilers, process control, opinion research, typography  
Private Pilot.and sailor for fun. 

I don't know about you but I never want to do the same job twice and my somewhat unique skill set allowed me that luxury. I have had the good fortune to be part of designs that went to the bottom of the oceans and into outer space with a lot of interesting stops between. 

In the specific case cited I was tasked with the mechanical design, material selection, integration , thermal management, plating, qualification and testing on the particular antenna. Someone else specceded the RF electrical parameter and geometry.  

Also I was at MIT in the 80's anyone at Lincoln labs I might have met are not likely to still be there. Besides they were not a large part of the Undergrad experience so I'm unclear why you think I should know them? 

  • Downvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dude. When you find yourself typing out your CV in the political branch of a sailing forum, it's time to chill the fuck out and go smell the roses.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Battlecheese said:

Dude. When you find yourself typing out your CV in the political branch of a sailing forum, it's time to chill the fuck out and go smell the roses.

I'm waiting for him to list all the things he did in the war.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Ease the sheet. said:

What? No photos?

A number of airbases have specific conditions of high humidity and low air movement. A carrier at 25kn doesn't have low air movement.

 

 

So you agree the alloy used in the F-35 is susceptible to rust.

 

Btw exco is way more worse than intergranular corrosion. Thanks for correcting me on the seriousness of the problem.

In the carrier hanger the air flow is not 25 knots.

Name an alloy of aluminum that will not corrode. 

 

  • Downvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

Aerospace Engineering MIT. Prior education and experience in computer science and electronic engineering. 

Attendance does not imply qualification. Your bullshit claims trying to weasel your way out of that have already been soundly beaten into a quivering pulp and buried alongside the family pet in the back yard.

You've already fucked that sheep, no need to remind everyone how deep you plunged yourself into the poor thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

In the carrier hanger the air flow is not 25 knots.

Name an alloy of aluminum that will not corrode. 

 

You seem to be asking irrelevant questions.

Either you agree with yourself that the particular grade of aluminium alloy used in the F-35 has corrosion issues of it doesn't.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Ease the sheet. said:

You seem to be asking irrelevant questions.

Either you agree with yourself that the particular grade of aluminium alloy used in the F-35 has corrosion issues of it doesn't.

 

Every material used in a plane or satellite or toaster involves trade offs.  

AA 7075  and 7050 were the goto high strength Al for a lot of Aircraft critical parts, land gear, spars, bulkheads etc.  

AA 7085 is  new to fighters but not aircraft (A380 landing gear for example)  

This is what one overview  says 

 
T. Ram Prabhu. An Overview of High-Performance Aircraft Structural Al Alloy-AA7085. Acta Metallurgica Sinica(English Letters), 2015, 28(7): 909-921  copy.gif
Permissions
An Overview of High-Performance Aircraft Structural Al Alloy-AA7085
T. Ram Prabhu1REemail.gif
 
The exfoliation corrosion resistance of an AA7085-T76 alloy was rated P (i.e. no exfoliation) according to the ASTM G 34 even after 4 years of seacoast exposure [46, 50]. In contrast, the AA7075-T6 alloy exhibits severe exfoliation (rated EC/ED) after 4 years of exposure. This shows that the AA7085 alloy has much better exfoliation corrosion resistance than the AA7075 alloy.
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

Every material used in a plane or satellite or toaster involves trade offs.  

AA 7075  and 7050 were the goto high strength Al for a lot of Aircraft critical parts, land gear, spars, bulkheads etc.  

AA 7085 is  new to fighters but not aircraft (A380 landing gear for example)  

This is what one overview  says 

 
T. Ram Prabhu. An Overview of High-Performance Aircraft Structural Al Alloy-AA7085. Acta Metallurgica Sinica(English Letters), 2015, 28(7): 909-921  copy.gif
Permissions
An Overview of High-Performance Aircraft Structural Al Alloy-AA7085
T. Ram Prabhu1REemail.gif
 
The exfoliation corrosion resistance of an AA7085-T76 alloy was rated P (i.e. no exfoliation) according to the ASTM G 34 even after 4 years of seacoast exposure [46, 50]. In contrast, the AA7075-T6 alloy exhibits severe exfoliation (rated EC/ED) after 4 years of exposure. This shows that the AA7085 alloy has much better exfoliation corrosion resistance than the AA7075 alloy.

Hence the Australian report about the effects of specific Australian conditions on the F-35 and the specific Australian response.

 

Your knee jerk reach for the Kleenex was amusing though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Ease the sheet. said:

Hence the Australian report about the effects of specific Australian conditions on the F-35 and the specific Australian response.

 

Your knee jerk reach for the Kleenex was amusing though.

This thread was trumpeted out as a "See? See the F35 is garbage" ; even misusing the word Rust for effect. 

When in fact the F-35 is less likely to suffer from this issue than legacy fighters are. I wonder if they dehumidify their F-18s which undoubtedly use the LESS corrosion resistant  AA 7075 in critical structural areas? 

One more fake attempt to discredit the F-35 get shot down. 

image.thumb.png.3d1ddbb6e8422bfff1af596eeb04a696.png

image.thumb.png.5346e8c0047cd5cf8163fc656543ca53.png

image.thumb.png.66ebf8d01b435ad50afff2b1292b2230.png

 

Link to navy corrosion manuals

http://everyspec.com/USN/NAVAIR/NAVAIR_01-1A-509-2_48509/

image.thumb.png.2951afb3acedd1f302c855b56045358a.png

http://www.navybmr.com/study%20material/NAVAIR%2001-1A-509-2%20(2014).pdf

 

image.thumb.png.b341139173ac4c8bd345161c9862928b.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone spun up the Malarkey.

 

And the Navy and AF say the program is a failure. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a non issue and always was a non issue. Like every F-35 story to come down the pike. This one got twisted as well to try and suggest Lockheed screwed up and completely missed the fact that aluminyum can corrode. 

Corrosion prevention starts with good design and continues forever as a maintenance learning curve.  This was never some gotcha revelation. And Aluminum is not a ferrous metal hence it does not Rust. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What modern American superweapon has not been called a failure?   

LCS 2 classes?  They finally found an engine less reliable then triple expansion, plus hulls are vulnerable if hit by a wave.   Bad batteries.

Zumwalt?   The Admiral would be horrified to have his name attached to this wealth redistribution program.   Rail gun.  Batteries.   

CVN?   I think they are a build on of the Nimitz, the main issue seems to be everything that is different.   

F-35?   Stealthy underwater at least.

So what modern example of the American military industrial complex should we hold up with patriotic pride?

I realize refusal to change is self defeating.   The US military seems to be guilty of the opposite, an easy mark for every possible new and unproven technology the salesmen can devise.   We keep buying super weapons that are barely reliable in peacetime circumstances.   We pay ever escalating prices.   Meanwhile we rebuild ancient systems because they are more reliable then the new equipment.    When the US navy faced a superior Japanese force after Pearl Harbor they overcame by taking great risks.  Would we be able and willing to risk temperamental weapons that take decades to build, are too expensive to replace without the admiral facing a Congressional inquiry, and rival the reliability of a 1970's British car?   

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

This thread was trumpeted out as a "See? See the F35 is garbage" ; even misusing the word Rust for effect. 

When in fact the F-35 is less likely to suffer from this issue than legacy fighters are. I wonder if they dehumidify their F-18s which undoubtedly use the LESS corrosion resistant  AA 7075 in critical structural areas? 

One more fake attempt to discredit the F-35 get shot down. 

image.thumb.png.3d1ddbb6e8422bfff1af596eeb04a696.png

image.thumb.png.5346e8c0047cd5cf8163fc656543ca53.png

image.thumb.png.66ebf8d01b435ad50afff2b1292b2230.png

 

Link to navy corrosion manuals

http://everyspec.com/USN/NAVAIR/NAVAIR_01-1A-509-2_48509/

image.thumb.png.2951afb3acedd1f302c855b56045358a.png

http://www.navybmr.com/study material/NAVAIR 01-1A-509-2 (2014).pdf

 

image.thumb.png.b341139173ac4c8bd345161c9862928b.png

Have a sook.

The F-35 exists and will exist because it the only one of its kind. Countries will fly it and deal with all its warts because that's all there is.

The people that you think are against it don't give a fuck about it. They're against the idea of it. An expensive manned plane? How very 1980. How much insulin could 1 plane buy?

There are so many reasons to not have the F-35. It's actual problems are way down that list of reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Lark said:

What modern American superweapon has not been called a failure?   

LCS 2 classes?  They finally found an engine less reliable then triple expansion, plus hulls are vulnerable if hit by a wave.   Bad batteries.

Zumwalt?   The Admiral would be horrified to have his name attached to this wealth redistribution program.   Rail gun.  Batteries.   

CVN?   I think they are a build on of the Nimitz, the main issue seems to be everything that is different.   

F-35?   Stealthy underwater at least.

So what modern example of the American military industrial complex should we hold up with patriotic pride?

I realize refusal to change is self defeating.   The US military seems to be guilty of the opposite, an easy mark for every possible new and unproven technology the salesmen can devise.   We keep buying super weapons that are barely reliable in peacetime circumstances.   We pay ever escalating prices.   Meanwhile we rebuild ancient systems because they are more reliable then the new equipment.    When the US navy faced a superior Japanese force after Pearl Harbor they overcame by taking great risks.  Would we be able and willing to risk temperamental weapons that take decades to build, are too expensive to replace without the admiral facing a Congressional inquiry, and rival the reliability of a 1970's British car?   

 

That is pretty bleak. Fortunately it is not true. 

I have just made you president and given you a pliable congress. What budget would you give the US military going forward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

Aerospace Engineering MIT. Prior education and experience in computer science and electronic engineering. 

A cross disciplinarian. 

Mechanical design
Propulsion (rockets not jets)
Space systems,  environmental testing of satellites, and integration
power systems, especially solar on satellites
Analog, RF and digital design  (also an amateur Extra Class) 
Software design at the system level. Language compilers, process control, opinion research, typography  
Private Pilot.and sailor for fun. 

I don't know about you but I never want to do the same job twice and my somewhat unique skill set allowed me that luxury. I have had the good fortune to be part of designs that went to the bottom of the oceans and into outer space with a lot of interesting stops between. 

In the specific case cited I was tasked with the mechanical design, material selection, integration , thermal management, plating, qualification and testing on the particular antenna. Someone else specceded the RF electrical parameter and geometry.  

Also I was at MIT in the 80's anyone at Lincoln labs I might have met are not likely to still be there. Besides they were not a large part of the Undergrad experience so I'm unclear why you think I should know them? 

Let’s see a picture of your MIT degree. Don’t worry, we’ll wait. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

That is pretty bleak. Fortunately it is not true. 

I have just made you president and given you a pliable congress. What budget would you give the US military going forward.

2% GDP NATO minimum, maximum is sum of China and Russia.   That will make any arms race pointless, as the more they spend the more we waste.    If that isn’t enough to defend against the two nations, it’s just proof of waste based on the 3:1 rule.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Monkey said:

Let’s see a picture of your MIT degree. Don’t worry, we’ll wait. 

He, or at least his prior personality, told us there is some double-secret probation requirement of MIT folks to never do that.

Or, so he says.

Of course, he is a pathological liar.  Like the President.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

He, or at least his prior personality, told us there is some double-secret probation requirement of MIT folks to never do that.

Or, so he says.

Of course, he is a pathological liar.  Like the President.

To be fair, Trump got elected president of the United States. That, in and of itself blows away Happy Jack’s mythical accomplishments. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's just being modest.

He also improved the Theory of Relativity, wrote Bridge over troubled Water, and singlehandedly defeated the hushed-up alien invasion in 1997.  His Mormon underwear gives him secret powers.

You tell that to the lefty sickos around here and they just won't believe you......

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Happy said:

He's just being modest.

He also improved the Theory of Relativity, wrote Bridge over troubled Water, and singlehandedly defeated the hushed-up alien invasion in 1997.  His Mormon underwear gives him secret powers.

You tell that to the lefty sickos around here and they just won't believe you......

 

Could you get him to change the gravitational constant while he's at it?  I have some great new products but that g thing is way too big.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Too bad Jack is too cowardly to answer this article. Why does he support the Ridgeline of the skies?

 

 "Over the past several years, U.S. Defense Department leaders have gone from citing technical problems as their biggest concern for the F-35 program to bemoaning the expense of buying and sustaining the aircraft.

But the reality may be worse. According to documents exclusively obtained by Defense News, the F-35 continues to be marred by flaws and glitches that, if left unfixed, could create risks to pilot safety and call into question the fighter jet’s ability to accomplish key parts of its mission:

F-35B and F-35C pilots, compelled to observe limitations on airspeed to avoid damage to the F-35’s airframe or stealth coating. Cockpit pressure spikes that cause “excruciating” ear and sinus pain. Issues with the helmet-mounted display and night vision camera that contribute to the difficulty of landing the F-35C on an aircraft carrier.

These are some of the problems with the jet that the documents describe as category 1 deficiencies — the designation given to major flaws that impact safety or mission effectiveness.

 

Thirteen of the most serious flaws are described in detail, including the circumstances associated with each issue, how it impacts F-35 operations and the Defense Department’s plans to ameliorate it.

All but a couple of these problems have escaped intense scrutiny by Congress and the media. A few others have been briefly alluded to in reports by government watchdog groups.

But the majority of these problems have not been publicly disclosed, exposing a lack of transparency about the limitations of the Defense Department’s most expensive and high-profile weapons system.

These problems impact far more operators than the U.S. Air Force, Marine Corps and Navy customer base. Eleven countries — Australia, Belgium, Denmark, Italy, Israel, the Netherlands, Norway, Japan, South Korea, Turkey and the United Kingdom — have all selected the aircraft as their future fighter of choice, and nine partner nations have contributed funds to the development of the F-35.

Taken together, these documents provide evidence that the F-35 program is still grappling with serious technical problems, even as it finds itself in a key transitional moment.

<snip> 

The 13 deficiencies include:

  • The F-35’s logistics system currently has no way for foreign F-35 operators to keep their secret data from being sent to the United States.
  • The spare parts inventory shown by the F-35’s logistics system does not always reflect reality, causing occasional mission cancellations.
  • Cabin pressure spikes in the cockpit of the F-35 have been known to cause barotrauma, the word given to extreme ear and sinus pain.
  • In very cold conditions — defined as at or near minus 30 degrees Fahrenheit — the F-35 will erroneously report that one of its batteries have failed, sometimes prompting missions to be aborted.
  • Supersonic flight in excess of Mach 1.2 can cause structural damage and blistering to the stealth coating of the F-35B and F-35C.
  • After doing certain maneuvers, F-35B and F-35C pilots are not always able to completely control the aircraft’s pitch, roll and yaw.
  • If the F-35A and F-35B blows a tire upon landing, the impact could also take out both hydraulic lines and pose a loss-of-aircraft risk.
  • A “green glow” sometimes appears on the helmet-mounted display, washing out the imagery in the helmet and making it difficult to land the F-35C on an aircraft carrier.
  • On nights with little starlight, the night vision camera sometimes displays green striations that make it difficult for all variants to see the horizon or to land on ships.
  • The sea search mode of the F-35’s radar only illuminates a small slice of the sea’s surface.
  • When the F-35B vertically lands on very hot days, older engines may be unable to produce the required thrust to keep the jet airborne, resulting in a hard landing.

The Pentagon has identified four additional category 1 deficiencies since beginning operational tests in December 2018, mostly centered around weapons interfaces, Winter said.

More at the link: https://www.defensenews.com/air/2019/06/12/the-pentagon-is-battling-the-clock-to-fix-serious-unreported-f-35-problems/

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, badlatitude said:

Too bad Jack is too cowardly to answer this article. Why does he support the Ridgeline of the skies?

 

 "Over the past several years, U.S. Defense Department leaders have gone from citing technical problems as their biggest concern for the F-35 program to bemoaning the expense of buying and sustaining the aircraft.

But the reality may be worse. According to documents exclusively obtained by Defense News, the F-35 continues to be marred by flaws and glitches that, if left unfixed, could create risks to pilot safety and call into question the fighter jet’s ability to accomplish key parts of its mission:

F-35B and F-35C pilots, compelled to observe limitations on airspeed to avoid damage to the F-35’s airframe or stealth coating. Cockpit pressure spikes that cause “excruciating” ear and sinus pain. Issues with the helmet-mounted display and night vision camera that contribute to the difficulty of landing the F-35C on an aircraft carrier.

These are some of the problems with the jet that the documents describe as category 1 deficiencies — the designation given to major flaws that impact safety or mission effectiveness.

 

Thirteen of the most serious flaws are described in detail, including the circumstances associated with each issue, how it impacts F-35 operations and the Defense Department’s plans to ameliorate it.

All but a couple of these problems have escaped intense scrutiny by Congress and the media. A few others have been briefly alluded to in reports by government watchdog groups.

But the majority of these problems have not been publicly disclosed, exposing a lack of transparency about the limitations of the Defense Department’s most expensive and high-profile weapons system.

These problems impact far more operators than the U.S. Air Force, Marine Corps and Navy customer base. Eleven countries — Australia, Belgium, Denmark, Italy, Israel, the Netherlands, Norway, Japan, South Korea, Turkey and the United Kingdom — have all selected the aircraft as their future fighter of choice, and nine partner nations have contributed funds to the development of the F-35.

Taken together, these documents provide evidence that the F-35 program is still grappling with serious technical problems, even as it finds itself in a key transitional moment.

<snip> 

The 13 deficiencies include:

  • The F-35’s logistics system currently has no way for foreign F-35 operators to keep their secret data from being sent to the United States.
  • The spare parts inventory shown by the F-35’s logistics system does not always reflect reality, causing occasional mission cancellations.
  • Cabin pressure spikes in the cockpit of the F-35 have been known to cause barotrauma, the word given to extreme ear and sinus pain.
  • In very cold conditions — defined as at or near minus 30 degrees Fahrenheit — the F-35 will erroneously report that one of its batteries have failed, sometimes prompting missions to be aborted.
  • Supersonic flight in excess of Mach 1.2 can cause structural damage and blistering to the stealth coating of the F-35B and F-35C.
  • After doing certain maneuvers, F-35B and F-35C pilots are not always able to completely control the aircraft’s pitch, roll and yaw.
  • If the F-35A and F-35B blows a tire upon landing, the impact could also take out both hydraulic lines and pose a loss-of-aircraft risk.
  • A “green glow” sometimes appears on the helmet-mounted display, washing out the imagery in the helmet and making it difficult to land the F-35C on an aircraft carrier.
  • On nights with little starlight, the night vision camera sometimes displays green striations that make it difficult for all variants to see the horizon or to land on ships.
  • The sea search mode of the F-35’s radar only illuminates a small slice of the sea’s surface.
  • When the F-35B vertically lands on very hot days, older engines may be unable to produce the required thrust to keep the jet airborne, resulting in a hard landing.

The Pentagon has identified four additional category 1 deficiencies since beginning operational tests in December 2018, mostly centered around weapons interfaces, Winter said.

More at the link: https://www.defensenews.com/air/2019/06/12/the-pentagon-is-battling-the-clock-to-fix-serious-unreported-f-35-problems/

 

Same story but from a different source:

”The F-35 fighter is the most expensive weapons program in the world and Lockheed Martin's biggest revenue generator. Despite a history of cost overruns and schedule delays, the program continues to get more orders.”

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, jerseyguy said:

Same story but from a different source:

”The F-35 fighter is the most expensive weapons program in the world and Lockheed Martin's biggest revenue generator. Despite a history of cost overruns and schedule delays, the program continues to get more orders.”

 

"I'd like 6 supersonic stealth fighters...how much can i get em for without the supersonic part?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, badlatitude said:

Too bad Jack is too cowardly to answer this article. Why does he support the Ridgeline of the skies?

Jack has always had great timing for taking a cruise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, jerseyguy said:

Same story but from a different source:

”The F-35 fighter is the most expensive weapons program in the world and Lockheed Martin's biggest revenue generator. Despite a history of cost overruns and schedule delays, the program continues to get more orders.”

 

So kind of like the Ridgeline, but still unsafe at any speed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

Jack has always had great timing for tasking a cruise.

The downside is that all these threads will be here when he gets back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, badlatitude said:

The downside is that all these threads will be here when he gets back.

And, he'll deny it is him.  All while touting the Ridgeline, the F-35, MIT, and his mini-cannon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Bus Driver said:

And, he'll deny it is him.  All while touting the Ridgeline, the F-35, MIT, and his mini-cannon.

We need a new strategy for dealing with him. I mean besides just putting him on ignore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, MR.CLEAN said:

"I'd like 6 supersonic stealth fighters...how much can i get em for without the supersonic part?"

Go too fast and the stealth wears off.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.defensenews.com/smr/hidden-troubles-f35/2019/06/12/when-us-navy-and-marine-f-35-pilots-most-need-performance-the-aircraft-becomes-erratic/

"The U.S. Navy’s and Marine Corps’ F-35s become unpredictable to handle when executing the kind of extreme maneuvers a pilot would use in a dogfight or while avoiding a missile, according to documents exclusively obtained by Defense News.

Specifically, the Marine short-takeoff-and-vertical-landing variant and the Navy’s carrier-launched version become difficult to control when the aircraft is operating above a 20-degree angle of attack, which is the angle created by the oncoming air and the leading edge of the wing.

Pilots reported the aircraft experiencing unpredictable changes in pitch, as well as erratic yaw and rolling motions. The documents identify the issue as a category 1 deficiency and define it as something that limits the aircraft’s performance in such a way that it can’t accomplish its “primary or alternate mission(s).” In this scale, category 1 represents the most serious type of deficiency."

Oopsy daisy.

"At extremely high altitudes, the Navy and Marine Corps versions of the F-35 can only fly at supersonic speeds for short bursts of time without risking structural damage and loss of its stealth capability, a problem that may make it impossible for the Navy’s F-35C to conduct supersonic intercepts."

Double oops. Don't let it get too hot either.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Zonker said:

https://www.defensenews.com/smr/hidden-troubles-f35/2019/06/12/when-us-navy-and-marine-f-35-pilots-most-need-performance-the-aircraft-becomes-erratic/

"The U.S. Navy’s and Marine Corps’ F-35s become unpredictable to handle when executing the kind of extreme maneuvers a pilot would use in a dogfight or while avoiding a missile, according to documents exclusively obtained by Defense News.

Specifically, the Marine short-takeoff-and-vertical-landing variant and the Navy’s carrier-launched version become difficult to control when the aircraft is operating above a 20-degree angle of attack, which is the angle created by the oncoming air and the leading edge of the wing.

Pilots reported the aircraft experiencing unpredictable changes in pitch, as well as erratic yaw and rolling motions. The documents identify the issue as a category 1 deficiency and define it as something that limits the aircraft’s performance in such a way that it can’t accomplish its “primary or alternate mission(s).” In this scale, category 1 represents the most serious type of deficiency."

Oopsy daisy.

"At extremely high altitudes, the Navy and Marine Corps versions of the F-35 can only fly at supersonic speeds for short bursts of time without risking structural damage and loss of its stealth capability, a problem that may make it impossible for the Navy’s F-35C to conduct supersonic intercepts."

Double oops. Don't let it get too hot either.

 

We’ll just wish it away.  Don’t raise the bridge, lower the river

 

”Nine of the 13 problems are expected to be corrected or downgraded to category 2 status by the time the Pentagon makes its decision on starting full-rate production. A further two will be tackled in future software builds.

Winter said none of the issues represent any serious or catastrophic risk to pilots, mission effectiveness or the F-35 air frame. The problems are said to come under category 1B, which means mission-impacting issues have a short-term workaround and can be corrected in the future.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would think erratic flight profile would help in evading missiles. Win win, no?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Pentagon is battling the clock to fix serious, unreported F-35 problems

WASHINGTON — Over the past several years, U.S. Defense Department leaders have gone from citing technical problems as their biggest concern for the F-35 program to bemoaning the expense of buying and sustaining the aircraft.

But the reality may be worse. According to documents exclusively obtained by Defense News, the F-35 continues to be marred by flaws and glitches that, if left unfixed, could create risks to pilot safety and call into question the fighter jet’s ability to accomplish key parts of its mission:

F-35B and F-35C pilots, compelled to observe limitations on airspeed to avoid damage to the F-35’s airframe or stealth coating. Cockpit pressure spikes that cause “excruciating” ear and sinus pain. Issues with the helmet-mounted display and night vision camera that contribute to the difficulty of landing the F-35C on an aircraft carrier.

https://www.defensenews.com/air/2019/06/12/the-pentagon-is-battling-the-clock-to-fix-serious-unreported-f-35-problems/

Doubtlessly, our Jack is on the case. BTW, why would problems be unreported?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OSFA = One Size Failure Always.  Or 2 out of 3 ain't that good.  At least the AF one seems to be mediocre for the money. For the Top Gun theme it plays "Take It Easy" by the F15 Eagles. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, d'ranger said:

For the Top Gun theme it plays "Take It Easy" by the F15 Eagles. 

[groan]

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this