Posted on Dec 16, 2015
Lockheed Martin says F-35 back on track after years of delays and budget increases. Marines, Navy & AF agree... Do you?
6.81K
8
10
1
1
0
"The project has gotten a boost recently after years of trouble. The Marine Corps gave its initial okay to the plane over the summer, and the Air Force and Navy are expected to follow suit over the next two years. Lockheed officials hosted a demonstration of the F-35's technology for local politicians and reporters Monday to draw attention to its progress."
PINELLAS PARK, Fla. (Tribune News Service) — Daniel Conroy knows the F-35 Lightning II program has had its problems, delayed for years and costing far more than first expected.
But the Pentagon's ambitious fighter jet project is finally back on track, says Conroy, director of the Air Force F-35 program for Lockheed Martin, which is building the plane.
"The program has been challenging, flight test has been difficult, but we've worked through a lot of issues," Conroy said Monday at Lockheed Martin's facility here. "We can see the light at the end of the tunnel."
Once it ramps up to full-scale production, Lockheed will make close to 200 of the fighter jets a year, up from the 45 it expects to build this year. The Government Accountability Office, initially forecast it would reach full production in 2012, but now says that won't happen until 2019.
Eventually, the company's Pinellas Park factory will start working two shifts to make the airplane's canopy — the windshield and the frame that keeps it in place. About 30 people work on the production line now, but the project will employ close to 200 at full capacity, said Scott Williams, Lockheed's Pinellas Park production manager.
Statewide, the impact will be much larger. More than 100 of the F-35's suppliers are based in Florida, and Lockheed Martin is making sensors and developing computer systems for the fighter jet in Orlando, Conroy said. In all, the company says the program will bring 13,000 jobs to the state.
The project has gotten a boost recently after years of trouble. The Marine Corps gave its initial okay to the plane over the summer, and the Air Force and Navy are expected to follow suit over the next two years. Lockheed officials hosted a demonstration of the F-35's technology for local politicians and reporters Monday to draw attention to its progress.
Its pitch: The F-35 is hugely complicated — and important. It's designed to replace the military's aging fleet of fighter jets with a plane that can be used for decades, one that combines stealth with technological advancements.
"A program of this significance is always going to have some challenges," said U.S. Rep. David Jolly, R-Indian Shores, who visited Lockheed's Pinellas Park plant Monday. "We're going to have an asset adding great value to the taxpayer that protects our men and women in uniform."
But getting to this point has been difficult for the aerospace giant, and government watchdogs say the project isn't in the clear just yet.
From design to assembly, the F-35 project is expected to cost $391.1 billion, according to the Government Accountability Office, up 68 percent from initial projections of $233 billion. And the government is expected to buy 2,457 planes, 400 fewer than first thought.
In an April report, the watchdog agency said the project had mostly gotten into line and costs have been "mostly stable" since the Pentagon changed its budget and time line in 2012. But the report was critical of the plane's engine, saying it "has a long way to go to meet program goals."
And with testing ongoing, "more technical problems are likely," the agency said. "Addressing new problems and improving engine reliability may require additional design changes and retrofits."
Those comments followed problems the F-35 encountered in test flights. Testing on some planes had to be stopped when a part of the airframe called the bulkhead started to fracture, and in June 2014, an engine caught fire because of overheating.
But Conroy defended the program's progress so far, saying that those issues were an inevitable part of testing and that Lockheed and its suppliers fixed them.
"You don't get through any flight test program, especially one as complex as this, without having a few things that you just go, 'Wow, I wouldn't have thought of that,' " he said. "But the good news is there hasn't been anything insurmountable. We've worked through things pretty quickly."
http://www.stripes.com/news/air-force/lockheed-martin-says-f-35-back-on-track-after-years-of-delays-budget-increases-1.384211
PINELLAS PARK, Fla. (Tribune News Service) — Daniel Conroy knows the F-35 Lightning II program has had its problems, delayed for years and costing far more than first expected.
But the Pentagon's ambitious fighter jet project is finally back on track, says Conroy, director of the Air Force F-35 program for Lockheed Martin, which is building the plane.
"The program has been challenging, flight test has been difficult, but we've worked through a lot of issues," Conroy said Monday at Lockheed Martin's facility here. "We can see the light at the end of the tunnel."
Once it ramps up to full-scale production, Lockheed will make close to 200 of the fighter jets a year, up from the 45 it expects to build this year. The Government Accountability Office, initially forecast it would reach full production in 2012, but now says that won't happen until 2019.
Eventually, the company's Pinellas Park factory will start working two shifts to make the airplane's canopy — the windshield and the frame that keeps it in place. About 30 people work on the production line now, but the project will employ close to 200 at full capacity, said Scott Williams, Lockheed's Pinellas Park production manager.
Statewide, the impact will be much larger. More than 100 of the F-35's suppliers are based in Florida, and Lockheed Martin is making sensors and developing computer systems for the fighter jet in Orlando, Conroy said. In all, the company says the program will bring 13,000 jobs to the state.
The project has gotten a boost recently after years of trouble. The Marine Corps gave its initial okay to the plane over the summer, and the Air Force and Navy are expected to follow suit over the next two years. Lockheed officials hosted a demonstration of the F-35's technology for local politicians and reporters Monday to draw attention to its progress.
Its pitch: The F-35 is hugely complicated — and important. It's designed to replace the military's aging fleet of fighter jets with a plane that can be used for decades, one that combines stealth with technological advancements.
"A program of this significance is always going to have some challenges," said U.S. Rep. David Jolly, R-Indian Shores, who visited Lockheed's Pinellas Park plant Monday. "We're going to have an asset adding great value to the taxpayer that protects our men and women in uniform."
But getting to this point has been difficult for the aerospace giant, and government watchdogs say the project isn't in the clear just yet.
From design to assembly, the F-35 project is expected to cost $391.1 billion, according to the Government Accountability Office, up 68 percent from initial projections of $233 billion. And the government is expected to buy 2,457 planes, 400 fewer than first thought.
In an April report, the watchdog agency said the project had mostly gotten into line and costs have been "mostly stable" since the Pentagon changed its budget and time line in 2012. But the report was critical of the plane's engine, saying it "has a long way to go to meet program goals."
And with testing ongoing, "more technical problems are likely," the agency said. "Addressing new problems and improving engine reliability may require additional design changes and retrofits."
Those comments followed problems the F-35 encountered in test flights. Testing on some planes had to be stopped when a part of the airframe called the bulkhead started to fracture, and in June 2014, an engine caught fire because of overheating.
But Conroy defended the program's progress so far, saying that those issues were an inevitable part of testing and that Lockheed and its suppliers fixed them.
"You don't get through any flight test program, especially one as complex as this, without having a few things that you just go, 'Wow, I wouldn't have thought of that,' " he said. "But the good news is there hasn't been anything insurmountable. We've worked through things pretty quickly."
http://www.stripes.com/news/air-force/lockheed-martin-says-f-35-back-on-track-after-years-of-delays-budget-increases-1.384211
F-35
Technology
DoD
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 5
1
1
0
Curt, I'm an old Army dog but the F-35 is a huge money pit that could have been designed much better. I would hope that the congressional backers of this would know that, but there are some that stand to profit as Lockheed drains the government dry. It is an awesome fighter jet, just a little too pricy!
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Wrote a paper for my MBA on the financial disaster that the F-35 is, and will continue to be. The paper wrote itself. Could have been a 50 page paper with ease. After getting a tour of that aircraft this year and talking to the maintainers that work on it, I never thought I was so lucky to be in the F-18 Navy. As expensive as Super Hornets are, the F-35 will be a shameful fleecing of tax payer dollars. We will have to invent a few wars to justify the expense.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
MSgt Curtis Ellis Considering that everything will be unmanned within, what? 20 years? or so....total waste. Only Russia can touch our f-15's, 16's, 18's...(of potential enemies), and so, this is just 400 billion down the drain for nothing.
(1)
(0)
SN Greg Wright
SGT (Join to see) - Israel buys OUR airframes. They don't make their own. And anyway, we'll never go to war with them. China's airframes are laughable -- to wit: their 'vaunted' 1960's soviet carrier? Can't launch planes with any more weight than fuel load. Sure, there's lots of propaganda in the media (wonder who put that out there?!?!), but the reality is this: of all the countries in the world who MIGHT wind up in a shooting war...only Russia has airframes that match our own....and in some cases, best them. (Mig-39, Sukhoi PAK FA, et al)
So I stand by my original comment: 400 billion on the f-35 is a waste.
So I stand by my original comment: 400 billion on the f-35 is a waste.
(0)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
SN Greg Wright - "Israel buys OUR airframes."
So did Iran. Geopolitics happen.
Russia has an unfortunate habit of selling its hardware to other nations. More to the point, you're ignoring the threat of modern IADS and focusing purely on airframes. While we may not run into a PAK-FA any time soon, we're certainly likely to run into an S-400 or two. Or two hundred. The oil nations are buying up advanced IADS systems from whoever will take their money, and that includes systems from some of the top European defense contractors. After all, it's not like Europe is really buying a lot of European hardware.
In the end, war will decide who among us is right.
So did Iran. Geopolitics happen.
Russia has an unfortunate habit of selling its hardware to other nations. More to the point, you're ignoring the threat of modern IADS and focusing purely on airframes. While we may not run into a PAK-FA any time soon, we're certainly likely to run into an S-400 or two. Or two hundred. The oil nations are buying up advanced IADS systems from whoever will take their money, and that includes systems from some of the top European defense contractors. After all, it's not like Europe is really buying a lot of European hardware.
In the end, war will decide who among us is right.
(1)
(0)
SN Greg Wright
SGT (Join to see) - Can't argue with that. They're flying the last of operational Tomcats. (which personally chaps my ass, I love those birds. But I digress.)
Look, I'm an armchair Admiral, so I don't profess to be any more an expert than my armchair confers upon me. So I'm willing to be wrong. None of the Euro airframes scare me, given equal pilots. Put equally skilled pilots in, say, a Tornado, and an F-18, and I take the Ff-18 every time. Do the same for that F-18 and a PAK-FA....eehhhh...I'm hedging my bets.
Today's poster child is China. Which I just don't get. None of their hardware, from subs to aircraft, is even remotely close to ours. Or even Russia's. Russia is the only country on earth, GIVEN THE POLITICAL WILL TO ACTUALLY FIGHT THEM, that scares me. China doesn't. No one in the Middle East does. India is up-and-coming, with good strides (they have a decent carrier now, but fall short on the planes flying off it) And let's face it. No one in Europe is going to go to war with us
And so still, to me: the f-35 is a colossal waste of money. To me.
But like I said: I'm willing to be wrong, and educated.
Look, I'm an armchair Admiral, so I don't profess to be any more an expert than my armchair confers upon me. So I'm willing to be wrong. None of the Euro airframes scare me, given equal pilots. Put equally skilled pilots in, say, a Tornado, and an F-18, and I take the Ff-18 every time. Do the same for that F-18 and a PAK-FA....eehhhh...I'm hedging my bets.
Today's poster child is China. Which I just don't get. None of their hardware, from subs to aircraft, is even remotely close to ours. Or even Russia's. Russia is the only country on earth, GIVEN THE POLITICAL WILL TO ACTUALLY FIGHT THEM, that scares me. China doesn't. No one in the Middle East does. India is up-and-coming, with good strides (they have a decent carrier now, but fall short on the planes flying off it) And let's face it. No one in Europe is going to go to war with us
And so still, to me: the f-35 is a colossal waste of money. To me.
But like I said: I'm willing to be wrong, and educated.
(0)
(0)
MCPO Roger Collins
If they can make a success of the V-22 Osprey and the Littoral combat ships, certainly with sufficient taxpayer dollars and patience, this can also become a success.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google