WT Forums

STOVL variant could see design trades


YOUNG ARGUES BENEFIT OF LOWERING JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER REQUIREMENTS


_______________________________________________


Date: June 28, 2004





The Pentagon should consider lowering some requirements for the Joint Strike Fighter, particularly for the short-takeoff-and-vertical-landing variant, in order to keep the program on schedule and under budget, according to Navy acquisition executive John Young.





“This plane is significantly more capable than the plane that it is replacing in terms of range, signature, maintainability. We are getting what we asked for,” Young said in a June 16 interview at his Pentagon office. “So if we lower that bar a little bit, we’re still putting an enormous warfighting capability in the hands of the pilot.”





The Defense Department is developing three variants of JSF: a conventional-takeoff-and-landing F-35 for use by the Air Force, a carrier variant for the Navy, and a STOVL variant for the Marine Corps and the Air Force. Earlier this year, the F-35 joint program office announced plans to delay the first flight of the CTOL aircraft, moving the date from late 2005 to summer 2006. The first flight of the STOVL variant is expected to follow one year later in the summer of 2007.





The decision to delay the program was largely due to weight problems that have plagued the three variants, particularly the STOVL aircraft, which is believed to be as much as 2,400 pounds overweight. The program office sought official approval to adjust the schedule at a June 17 meeting of the Defense Acquisition Board, chaired by acting Pentagon acquisition chief Michael Wynne. An acquisition decision memorandum detailing that change is currently awaiting Wynne’s signature, according to JSF program spokeswoman Kathy Crawford.





Speaking with Inside the Navy one day prior to the DAB meeting, Young said he viewed the review as an opportunity to discuss some potential design trades that could help keep the program on track. Program officials are often reluctant to adopt alternate designs out of fear that by giving “a little ground,” the services will not get the capability they bargained for, he said. But Young suggested that kind of logic is not helping the program deliver planes on time or at the right price.





“I think people have to come to the table with a greater dollar consciousness, and when the schedule is important it translates into dollars. So, we have to make decisions in a more timely manner, and we have to be much more aggressive about setting the bars at a reasonable place with the dollars that Congress is going to want to give us to deliver a product,” he said. “Because I think we can’t afford another slip in the program. . . . and in fact, we need to adjust some of the requirements down so that the dollars match what we are delivering, and we deliver that enormous capability.”





According to Young, the JSF STOVL weight attack team -- known as the “SWAT team” -- is looking at how adjustments to the bomb bay of that aircraft may save weight, but still meet requirements. He called that an example of the kind of design trades the services need to look at more closely. Officials should also determine what requirements could “move far down” without compromising operational capability. “We need to set the stage for those discussions to happen more urgently,” said Young.





ITN reported earlier this month that the JSF program was seeking approval to hold up construction of several CTOL prototypes in the system design and development phase of the program in order to start work earlier on the STOVL aircraft (ITN, June 7, p1). Under the revised schedule, the first aircraft built in the SDD phase will be a CTOL aircraft, followed directly by a STOVL plane, as opposed to building several CTOL aircraft before starting the STOVL variant. The move would accelerate when construction begins on the STOVL prototype, ITN reported.





At the time, a source called the switch a “significant change” in the program’s overall approach. But Young disagreed, saying the program has not “changed substantially.” He also said he did not consider the schedule change an acceleration of the STOVL prototype.





“It is a decision to hold the line on those demonstrators, rather than let them slip,” he said. Although the entire program will be delayed by one-year, he said the CTOL variant is only roughly six months behind its original schedule, while the STOVL variant was pushed back by about one year. He did not address the decision to move STOVL higher up in the line up of prototypes being built.





“We are knowingly building [CTOL] and [STOVL] in variants that are a little heavier than the ideal because we have the so-called SWAT team effort -- STOVL weight attack team -- that is working to get the STOVL weight down closer to the desired weight that let’s you use the operational parameters we set,” he said. The STOVL prototypes, in particular, will prove to be a challenge for the JSF program, but they are a “meetable challenge” Young said.





“Building those planes are almost informational,” he continued. “They prove out the manufacturing process.” While they will not be “fully missionized” aircraft, those CTOL and STOVL prototypes are “major risk mitigators” for the rest of the program, he said. -- Malina Brown

I saw this article too, Rick. I was expecting a re-think of the requirements as part of any overall fixes that are proposed. It must be accompanied by decreased commonality. That will be the next announcement.

THE CRAPTOR ENGINEERING TEAM <img src=icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle>
"The F-22...It's the poo"

_________________
????

<i>They have begun to refer to the first F-35A as a prototype. That is probably wise. Many necessary changes must be incorporated into the design, so it's better to "come clean" early. The customers, the media and the Congress must be on board with it, since I don't hear any complaining. Are the military project killers asleep? This is a golden opportunity for them. I'm confused by the quote from Burbage that states getting rid of weight and complexity is getting the cost down. I don't understand because it always cost me money to get weight out, both for engineering and production, and saving weight almost always adds complexity. Well, good luck to 'em. They need it because the govt. has "people down at Lockheed constantly". That's no fun. I'd rather be forced to walk around naked with panties on my head.</i>


<b>WORK SCHEDULED TO START ON F-35 <u>PROTOTYPE</u>:</b> The airplane that represents the future for Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. and thousands of Fort Worth jobs is about to take shape. Lockheed plans this week to begin assembling the first pieces of the <b>initial prototype</b> F-35 JSF. Production work on the first test aircraft to be assembled at Lockheed's Fort Worth plant will begin even as engineers work to shave pounds from the too-heavy next-generation fighter. It's a milestone for a work in progress. "Things are starting to come together," said Tom Burbage, executive VP of Lockheed's aeronautics division and director of the F-35 program. But it's a more complicated undertaking than Lockheed and its partners, Northrop Grumman and BAE Systems, were expecting -- or at least publicly acknowledged -- when the Pentagon awarded the JSF contract in October 2001. As the three prime contractors gear up to build the first of several test airplanes, they need to trim, in some cases, thousands of pounds from the designs so the three versions of the F-35 meet performance goals. Pentagon officials have already added a year and $5B to what has been called an optimistic schedule and budget. The first flight of the first plane is now scheduled for early 2006, a year later than originally planned. Northrop began work several weeks ago on the forward fuselage. Lockheed will begin assembling midfuselage pieces this week and the wing structure late this month or in early August. BAE begins assembling the rear fuselage and tail section in within a few weeks. "We've made good progress the last couple of months," Burbage says. The weight reduction effort has delivered other benefits as well. "What we're actually finding out," Burbage says, "is that by making the airplane lighter and less complex, we're driving the costs down. "Everybody is very optimistic [that] we're on the right path and moving in the right direction." Pentagon officials apparently agree. "We do feel like they're making progress," said Kathy Crawford, spokeswoman for the F-35 program office. "We have people down at Lockheed constantly," overseeing the contractors' efforts. (Fort Worth Star-Telegram)



THE CRAPTOR ENGINEERING TEAM <img src=icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle>
"The F-22...It's the poo"

_________________
????

Well now that CNO Clark has been confirmed for another term the USN IMHO is just a train wreck looking for a place to happen.

Heres my litany(In no particular order):

F-35 at least the versions slated for the USN and USMC
Osprey
Submarines in general
DD(X)
LPD 17
LCS
F/A 18 any and all variants
S-3 deactivation
Any attempt to keep the OHPs in service beyond 2010
Cutting the active personnel level
AAAV
Mine warfare(ever since WW II)IMHO and maybe not even then
BMD
Base closures
Outsourcing
Reduced manning
Sea Swap
FFRP
ERGM
ANSR
AGS 155mm
OR anything else to do with NSFS
CGX
MMA

LOL Did I miss anything????????????????????????????

Personally I think they should take existing, proven designs (like the F-14 and F-16), and make them even better. A Supertomcat or a Superfalcon, if you will.

Admin of the World Affairs Board
http://www.worldaffairsboard.com