F-35 completes latest round of sea trials

Two F-35Cs are back on land now, after completing the second round of sea trials on board the USS Eisenhower. The tests started with flying on board the ship, in less than optimal conditions. Testing included day and night flights, and included tests of the new helmet on board the ship.

The most dangerous portion of testing came when they did testing to determine the safe envelope for launching. To do the testing, they found the low end of the launch envelope, and then went just a little bit slower. Once they found the limit, they added 15 knots to it, which will become the standard for F-35 launch speeds on board carriers in the future.

The test pilots had nothing but praise for the aircraft, and there were no problems during the testing.

By midafternoon Friday, the teeth-rattling thunder from repeated catapult launches of the Navy's next-generation fighter plane had stopped.

The test pilots and crews for the F-35C Lightning II, the Navy's version of the new Joint Striker Fighter, were wrapping up a short stint on the aircraft carrier Dwight D. Eisenhower that began last week under "suboptimal conditions" as Hurricane Joaquin threatened and ended Friday under sunny skies.

In between, the single-engine stealth fighter, which is to join the Navy's fleet in 2018, underwent its second round of carrier takeoffs and landings about 100 miles off Virginia's coast. Its first carrier tests were a year ago on the Nimitz in the Pacific.

The Navy's jet is one of three versions of the same plane, with variations also built for the Air Force and the Marine Corps. The Navy's F-35 has a larger wingspan and reinforced equipment to allow for carrier landings, while the Marines' version can make vertical landings and operate with shorter takeoffs from the deck of an amphibious ship. The Marines declared their plane operational in July, and the Air Force expects to do the same in August.

hamptonroads.com...

Excellant news...What extra stuff has the Air Force have to do to finish its trials?

a reply to: Blackfinger

They need to do weapons release testing mostly. Once Hill has more aircraft they'll start generating more sorties, and get into weapons testing, and by next summer will have flown enough and released enough that they can declare IOC.

Good news maybe this will help quell some of the critics !

We still have F22's.. but I saw an F-35 at Miramar this and last year! Very impressive plane.

Have they done many inclement weather and night time arrests? Ive been wondering how the F-35 handles in those situations compared to the Super Hornet`s automatic system. Or do they have the same ACLS system? I get mixed up sometimes.

a reply to: StratosFear

The initial trap was after flying through the edges of Hurricane Juaquine. The weather wasn't awful, but it wasn't nice either when they initially trapped. This round of testing also included day and night testing for the helmet.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Have we heard how JPALS did?

a reply to: anzha

Not yet. They haven't said anything about specific systems yet. Probably won't for a week or so, while they go over the data.

To date... I am just not impressed with the F-35. She's slow and bulky with a single engine in an environment where a second has saved many lives. And even now, it has far less maneuver and performance abilities than the FA-18.

But... then again, if I had my way, I'd like to see a new version of the F-14 Tomcat produced. She was a beast that owned the air. My first wife's brother-in-law piloted them in the late '80s to the early '90s. He loved his job.

From what I gather, the F-14 series came to a close not because the FA-18 was that much better, but because of the titanium wing-sweep frame required and that Iran had a fleet we sent them before their Islamic take-over.

I hope the F-35 eventually matures into something worth all the time and money.

...

www.janes.com...

Another 'issue involving this aircraft. teething problems or something worse??

a reply to: blackbird93

It's just a thing that happens. In 2008 25% of the F-16 fleet had cracks, and over 100 F-15s were retired because of cracks and issues with longerons. This is well after they entered service.

This was found after the equivalent of almost 7,000 flight hours of a planned 8,000 hour initial life cycle. I'm not overly worried, but the anti-F-35 crowd should run with this as the latest sign it sucks.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Yes I see good point, but those aircraft are far older and have greater service history whereas the f35 is newer?. Im by no means anti f35 nor am i 100% behind it I feel it should be given a chance tho. But your right I'm sure those who are dead set against the f35 will use this. I would be concerned if this turnt out to be on all a b and c models and not just the navy model.

a reply to: blackbird93

Yes, they're older, but this aircraft was approaching the end of the planned life cycle, which is when you'd expect something like this.

It looks like it's an easy fix, and they shouldn't see anything like it with the aircraft actually flying, as they're all low time right now.

You're right though that this is fairly minor as it appears to be confined to just the C. It could be an issue with all the wing spars, or it could have resulted from a manufacturing issue with that particular set.

a reply to: Zaphod58

I'm far from an expert on this but could the crack occur from the impact of the aircraft on the ship when landing and the conditions at sea contributing to this.

One thing I'm certain of is once this aircraft is operational and problems ironed out it will be a formidable aircraft

a reply to: blackbird93

Yeah, that's one of several things that could pop up from both launch and landing. The cat shot puts stress on the wings as well.

a reply to: [post=20046908]Zaphod58[/

Exactly why trials are there for!! To find these issues out. Thankfully no one was hurt and it did not esculate.

I bet the anti f35 brigade will still refuse to believe anything other than information that beats the f35 up more.

a reply to: blackbird93

That's what so many people don't get. You WANT to see these issues come out during testing, when there are a relatively small number of aircraft, not when they're needed and there's a fleet of them.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Better there, then off the coast of where ever, during high-tempo operations.

Now, easy fix, no one dies. There, not so easy, and maybe a whole lot of people die.