F-35 JSF Hit by Serious Design Problems (updated)

Defense Industry Daily
03-Dec-2007 20:55

F-35 JSF Hit by Serious Design Problems (updated)

by Johan Boeder in The Netherlands.

Earlier versions of this article have been published in the Dutch
press and Defense-Aerospace. DID has worked with the author to create
an edited, updated version with full documentation of sources.

On May 3, 2007, during the 19th test flight of the prototype of the
F-35A Joint Strike Fighter (JSF), a serious electrical malfunction
occurred in the control of the plane. After an emergency landing the
malfunction could be identified as a crucial problem, and it became
clear that redesign of critical electronic components was necessary.
Producer Lockheed Martin and program officials first announced there
was a minor problem, and later on they avoided any further publicity
about the problems.

The delay has become serious, however, and rising costs for the JSF
program seem to be certain. In Holland, Parliament started a
discussion again last week. Understanding the background behind these
delays, and the pressures on European governments, is important to any
realistic assessment of the F-35's European strategy - and of the
procurement plans in many European defense ministriesŠ

The Fateful Incident
On December 15, 2006 the experienced Lockheed Martin chief test pilot
Jon Beesley takes off for the first time with the JSF (Joint Strike
Fighter), also known as F-35 Lighting II. The coming years, some 3000
Joint Strike Fighters are scheduled to be delivered to replace F-16
and Harrier fighters in the USA and in the air forces ad navies of
several European countries. In most cases, replacement contenders are
some combination of the Eurofighter, Rafale, Gripen and JSF. In many
cases, the new fighters must also be available by 2014-2018
ultimately, when early-model F-16s bought in Europe will reach their
end-of-life stage. Any further delay brings high maintenance costs,
and too low operational availability.

After a series of 7 quite successful flights, the test flight program
stops in February 2007 to fix some minor problems in the JSF flight
control software. This is not unusual in the early stages of a test
flight program.
In March 2007, the JSF returns to flight status and takes off for the
first supersonic flight. At the end of April the JSF prototype AA-1
takes off several times a week. But then, destiny strikes. On May 3,
2007 with the second test pilot Jeff Knowles at the stick, a serious
malfunction hits the JSF. At 38,000 feet (12 km) level flight and at a
speed of some 800 km/hour, the plane executed a planned, 360-degree
roll but experienced power loss in the electrical system about halfway
through the manoeuvre.

In an emergency procedure, power is restored and Jeff Knowles regains
control of the plane. The pilot cuts short this 19th test flight and
makes an emergency landing in Fort Worth, TX. Due to control problems
with right wing flaperons, the JSF has to make that landing at an
exceptional high speed of 220 knots (350 km/hr). The plane's
undercarriage, brakes and tires are damaged. The plane is stopped,
surrounded by emergency vehicles, and towed away, but several
eyewitnesses take pictures of the emergency landing.

Lockheed Martin technicians identify a component in the 270-power
supply as the culprit in the near-accident. The JSF's new technology
includes new electro-hydrostatic actuators (EHAs) for the flight
control system, replacing more conventional hydraulic systems. In
April 2007, chief test pilot Jon Beesley told Code One Magazine that
the EHAs were production versions, and that testing could be
restricted to the AA-1:

"The electro-hydrostatic actuators, or EHAs, are another excellent
example of risk reduction we're accomplishing on AA-1. This is the
first real electric jet. The flight control actuators, while they have
internal closed-loop hydraulic systems, are controlled and driven by
electricity‹not hydraulics. The F-35 is the only military aircraft
flying with such a system. We proved that the approach works on six
flights of the AFTI F-16 during the concept demonstration phase of the
JSF program. We already have many more flights on EHAs on this test
program. Because we are flying production versions of the EHAs on
AA-1, we won't have to prove the EHA design on subsequent F-35s."

After several weeks of evaluations, the engineers learn that there are
serious design problems in this new electrical system. Expensive
redesign will be necessary.

'No serious problem'?

Normally whenever the JSF takes an itty-bitty baby step, the
manufacturer reports it to the media for PR purposes. First engine
run? Reported.
Roll-out? Reported. First flight? Reported. First Wheel-up flight?
Reported.
But "first emergency landing"? Not reported. Fully two weeks later, on
May 17, 2007, chief test pilot Beesley comments in a short press
bulletin: "It was not a serious problem and the pilot never lost
control of the airplane".
Company officials say they don't expect any delays in the flight-test
program as a result of the incident, and repairs will be combined with
some regular, planned maintenance. Plans call for the fighter to
return to flight status in June 2007.

However, on July 10, 2007 Flight International announces disturbing
news.
Lockheed Martin official Bobby Williams now explains that there is a
serious design problem in the aircraft's electrical system. The fault
was caused by a shortcoming in the 270 volt system, when a lead inside
a box touched the lid. A complete review of close-tolerance spacing
and all electrical boxes is necessary. He adds that: "We will be back
into flight in August."

Another fact was discovered via a military employee of one of the
European air forces, who works within the JSF project team, and is a
liaison person for several air forces. He says that flying in 2012
with the JSF may be safe and the JSF can be used as a plane to fly
around. But, the several software modules for weapons system
integration will not be ready. Ground attack capability is the
priority, so early-build F-35s will primarily be "bomb trucks" until
the additional software modules can be tested and loaded. Air
superiority capabilities will be restricted, and completed only after
2015.
This means that full multi-role capability is possible by 2016 at the
earliest, if and only if no major problems occur in development and
testing of the weapon systems software.

So, will there be JSFs on European airbases without complete air
superiority capability in 2016? A sobering thought in the light of the
intensifying scrambling from UK and Norway since Russian TU-95 Bears
have began entering air space near Norway again in 2006.

Engine problems
Nor are these the only challenging problems facing the F-35 program.
The F-35C naval variant's Hamilton Sundstrand power generator was
mistakenly designed to only 65% of the required electric output. To
accommodate the required increase, it will also be necessary to
redesign the gearbox for the standard Pratt & Whitney F135 engine,
which will be fitted into the conventional F-35A version as well as
the naval F-35C. The contract announced by the US Department of
Defense in August 2007 says that this engine update won't be ready for
use until the end of 2009, which is almost the beginning of low-rate
initial production.

Lockheed Martin can issue a subcontract to Hamilton Sundstrand to fix
the F135's power generator without any publicity, and they have done
so. As of December 1, 2007, neither Lockheed Martin's nor Hamilton
Sundstrand's 2007 news archives show any trace of this award. Pratt &
Whitney has a separate government contract for the F135 engine,
however, and the award's size forces the Pentagon to announce the
award under its rules for publicizing contracts.

Although it seemed probable that last October the JSF would fly again,
a new problem arose. During a test run of the F135 engine, part of the
engine was blown up by overheating. On November 14, 2007, an
eyewitness took pictures of the transportation of a new F135 engine.
The date for test flight number 20 (of the scheduled 5,000 test
flights) is still unknown.

Manufacturer wants to alter JSF testing to save money

In an article that Bloomberg News publishes on August 31, 2007, it is
announced that Lockheed Martin is exceeding the budget on the first
phase of the Joint Strike Fighter program. The manufacturer warns that
the reserves will be spent by the end of 2008, unless cuts are made.
Lockheed Martin is seeking US Defense Department approval to lessen
the number of test aircraft and personal plus hundreds of test flights
to save money, and replenish a reserve fund.

It wants to build 2 fewer prototypes, and skip 800 of the 5,000
planned test flights. This after only 18 successful and 1 almost fatal
testflight in half a year's time.

Officialy, Lockheed Martin says the reason for the rising deficit is:
"the costs spent on redesigning a critical electronic part that failed
during a May test flight." Redesign of something as crucial as control
systems in this stage of such a complex project has to alert all
involved partners and governments.

Questions in Dutch Parliament

This main threat to the Joint Strike Fighter program, in terms of
growing costs and risks for planned delivery should have been made
public long ago.
In the Dutch parliament the Secretary of Defence was questioned on
Monday 19 November when the facts about the JSF delay and rising costs
were published in several Dutch newspapers on Sunday, November 18,
2007.

The Situation in Europe

The overall Joint Strike Fighter program is now projected to cost $299
billion, 28% more than its estimate of $233 billion when it started in
October 2001. The number of F-25 fighters to be produced, originally
estimated at over 3,500, will not be higher than 2,300 in the initial
production orders from all partners. Some US sources even speak about
an estimated 1,700.

Australia has decided to buy the more traditional, but advanced and
reliable F/A-18F Block II Super Hornet, in order to avoid any risks to
their air defense stemming from F-35 schedule slips. Some NATO
countries, including JSF partner nations Norway and Denmark, are
considering other options entirely, instead of the JSF. One European
candidate is the advanced but expensive twin-engined Eurofighter,
already in service with the UK, Spain, Germany, Italy, and Austria.
Another European candidate is the new Saab
JAS-39 Gripen Demo, an advanced version of the proven Saab Gripen
already operational with Sweden with NATO members the Czech Republic
and Hungary.

While the F-35's embedded sensor arrays will continue to offer
superior situational awareness, both of its biggest European
alternatives are expected to have similar advanced AESA radars and
electronics. They would also enter service with multi-role
capabilities, without the development risks of the JSF. Saab's Gripen
also claims a price per flight hour less than 60% of the JSF or
Eurofighter.

The pattern to date is a disturbing one, where a string of
difficulties that threaten to have serious impacts on the program's
schedule and costs are minimized by the manufacturer and its
industrial and governmental partners, or simply not announced. Note
that until the recent set of questions in Parliament, the manufacturer
succeeded in keeping politicians, the public, and most of the press
unaware of the very serious fact that since May 3,
2007 the flight test program has been stopped completely.

Without sufficient transparency, it is difficult for the public to
evaluate the fighter procurement choices that will have to be made in
the coming years by governments all over Europe - and even more
difficult to simply trust assertions that all will be well.

As is our practice, DID has contacted both the Joint Strike Fighter
program office and Lockheed Martin, inviting them to offer substantive
responses that directly address the issues raised in this article. If
these are forthcoming, they will also receive Guest Article status,
and a link will be included here.

Earlier Article Versions

Earlier version of this article has been published in full the Dutch
press (Nieuwsbank), as well as De Defensa [French], Defense-Aerospace,
and the Institution of Engineering and Technology (UK, similar to
IEEE). Shorter reports based on it have been featured by the Dutch
Algemeen Nederlands Persbureau and its subscribing Dutch media, and
have been the subject of coverage in Spain and France.

This is why they have test flights and why test pilots are test
pilots.

"David E. Powell" wrote in message
...
This is why they have test flights and why test pilots are test
pilots.


yup. But what is true is that leftists in the Dutch parliament have used the
event as the reason to call for an emergency session in an attempt (once
again) to withdraw from the program and instead extend the life of the F-16
for another 30 years (of course reducing the fleet further to provide for
spares by canibalising some aircraft).

On Dec 10, 10:06 am, Mike wrote:

Earlier versions of this article have been published in the Dutch
press and Defense-Aerospace. DID has worked with the author to create
an edited, updated version with full documentation of sources.

In other words, "no, really, we can prove all this..." Right, sure you
can.

Me, nah. My late uncle was an USAF A-1 Skyraider pilot based in
Thailand. Maybe you heard of the Vietnam War?
Mike

On Dec 10, 9:09 pm, "Mike Dennis" wrote:
You're a liberal arts major, aren't you?

"Mike" wrote in message
...

Me, nah. My late uncle was an USAF A-1 Skyraider pilot based in
Thailand. Maybe you heard of the Vietnam War?
Mike

On Dec 10, 9:09 pm, "Mike Dennis" wrote:
You're a liberal arts major, aren't you?


I don't see the connection.

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"Mike" wrote in message
...
Me, nah. My late uncle was an USAF A-1 Skyraider pilot based in
Thailand. Maybe you heard of the Vietnam War?
Mike

On Dec 10, 9:09 pm, "Mike Dennis" wrote:
You're a liberal arts major, aren't you?

I don't see the connection.



There isn't any unless there's a university that gives liberal arts
degrees in being related to veterans.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

"Dan" wrote in message
...

There isn't any unless there's a university that gives liberal arts
degrees in being related to veterans.


Yeah, that was pretty much my thought.

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 19:11:49 -0500, "Mike Dennis"
wrote:

"Mike" wrote in message
...
Me, nah. My late uncle was an USAF A-1 Skyraider pilot based in
Thailand. Maybe you heard of the Vietnam War?
Mike

On Dec 10, 9:09 pm, "Mike Dennis" wrote:
You're a liberal arts major, aren't you?

Well, I guess that makes you an expert.

90% of the tech/science "news" out there today--including the garbage that
you managed to string together--is written by liberal arts majors
(journalism, mainly) who have no technical ability to filter out the BS from
the facts. There are so many errors and opinions in there, it's not even
worth the time to list them.


Hey, you guys. Ease up on the liberal arts majors. When I found out
that a chemistry major was totally uninteresting to me, I redirected
into Political Science and despite that BS and a couple of MSs, I
still do OK with regard to tactical airplanes.

Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
www.thunderchief.org
www.thundertales.blogspot.com

Ed Rasimus wrote:
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 19:11:49 -0500, "Mike Dennis"
wrote:

"Mike" wrote in message
...
Me, nah. My late uncle was an USAF A-1 Skyraider pilot based in
Thailand. Maybe you heard of the Vietnam War?
Mike

On Dec 10, 9:09 pm, "Mike Dennis" wrote:
You're a liberal arts major, aren't you?
Well, I guess that makes you an expert.

90% of the tech/science "news" out there today--including the garbage that
you managed to string together--is written by liberal arts majors
(journalism, mainly) who have no technical ability to filter out the BS from
the facts. There are so many errors and opinions in there, it's not even
worth the time to list them.


Hey, you guys. Ease up on the liberal arts majors. When I found out
that a chemistry major was totally uninteresting to me, I redirected
into Political Science and despite that BS and a couple of MSs, I
still do OK with regard to tactical airplanes.

Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
www.thunderchief.org
www.thundertales.blogspot.com

OK, how about flying fighters is an art and stick actuators liberally
spend money at o'clubs?

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired