It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Interesting interview about the F-35

page: 1
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 28 2016 @ 06:00 PM
link   
There was an interesting interview released with Lt Col Raja Chari, Director of the F-35 Integrated Test Force and Commander of the 461st Flight Test Squadron. He came from the Rapid Capability Office, to take over the 461st, less than a year ago. He has over 2,000 hours in various platforms, and was involved in the testing of the F-15E AESA upgrade at Eglin AFB. He had some very interesting things to say about the F-35.


Question: What were your expectations when you came to the command about the program?

Answer: I knew very little about the F-35 programmatics when I was informed I was going to take command.

With all the negative press out there, my first task was to get ground truth on the program.

When I went to Eglin to learn to fly the plane, I saw a lot of F-35s on the tarmac, and that was a key ground truth – the program is way beyond getting out the gate.

Indeed, when I got here [to Edwards], we were on the cusp of IOC for the USMC F-35; that was a launch point for me as well.

The ship has sailed on the F-35 program.

We have this awesome airplane, now how do we get the best out of it?

That is my task.

Ground truth and some press reporting seem a bit out of whack with one another.



Question: We discussed the so-called F-16 and F-35 dogfight with colleagues earlier today, what is your take on this amazingly blown out of context story?

Answer: My first week here that story came out. I found the whole thing amazing because it did not even involve a simulated combat sortie. We were going after some particular test points.

The F-16 was simply a test aid, not in a dogfight with the F-35.

The story was simply spun and used by those who like to spin stories.


Because this happened just after I got here, I reached back to the leadership to determine whether this would have a chilling effect on our pilot reporting and discussions and was given clear guidance that we were not testing in response to the press, we were testing to evolve the aircraft.

That was made very clear from the top down. We are looking for accurate test and evolution of the aircraft, not a managed press campaign. Somebody else’s distortions are not going to deter our discussions.


www.sldinfo.com...




posted on Mar, 28 2016 @ 06:58 PM
link   


The F-35 is generating the air picture, which changes the situation for the AWACS dramatically. It does not need to tell me what I can see better than what I can already see; but it will become more like an airborne air battle manager. And as the F-35 intersects with ground, sea and other air systems, the entire Command and Control (C2) operation changes as well. The new challenge will be to get the right information to the right person at the right time; not just providing point outs on radar contacts like previous fighter/Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) integration.

Noice..



posted on Mar, 28 2016 @ 07:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58


I'm not going to explain the details, but on seeing the officer's name, I was struck by the memory of how the wife of Capt. Edward J. Ruppelt claimed after his death that he was chosen by the Air Force top brass as the first head of Project Blue Book because he was Jewish, outside the club, and they needed a scapegoat.

If you know the history of the ill-fated Air Force attempts to explain away the flying saucers with their first Project Sign and then their Project Grudge (!!!), which then became the totally ineffectual Project Blue Book, then just perhaps you can have some inkling of how things work at various levels.



posted on Mar, 28 2016 @ 07:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58
So is it ready or not, is is a system or not, and are all systems go?



posted on Mar, 28 2016 @ 07:51 PM
link   
a reply to: smurfy

Of course not, it hasn't completed development yet. But not every article and hit piece about it is showing what's really going on. Yes, it's a system, and it's improving every day, as it should be.
edit on 3/28/2016 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 01:20 AM
link   
a reply to: smurfy

What I would take away from this article is do not believe everything you read. The F-35 is a work in progress, do not judge it by it's Alpha state, have an open mind, and judge it by the completed project and only with actual facts, not spin.



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 10:20 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

And I would also guess that it's development is being strung along as a way of maintaining the industrial base (though they would never say it outright)

Aka, if this were the late 60's and our F-15s and -16s were falling out of the sky with alarming frequency when engaging Sukhoi's and Migs, you could bet your ass that the F-35's issues would be ironed out as quickly as the F-14's were.

But we're not in that situation, and we don't have another big fighter procurement RFP coming up every 4-5 years like the US did from the 50s through the 80s, and so while the USAF could have spent 150% what they already were per year on the -35 back in 2006 so Lockheed could fix all of its issues immediately and hit IOC by 2010, but Lockheed would then have essentially had to lay off all of the engineers it hired while it waited another decade for the F-XX/F/A-XX RFP's to come out.

Sure, China is jumping by leaps and bounds in the stealth game, but there still isn't even 1/10th of the belligerence there that there was from the Soviet Union in the "good" years during the cold war.



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 12:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Barnalby

Eh, not as much as you might think. They're essentially going from an early 80s car, with a rudimentary computer control system, straight to a 2016 car that's all computer, without the intermediate steps.



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 12:47 PM
link   
I have to wonder how much of the negativity about the F-35 is generated by Boeing sympathizers? Boeing stands to get a lot if it can discredit the F-35. Right now Canada is on the bubble to either commit to the F-35 or fall back on the F/A-18. If the US Navy cuts back on the F-35, it would have to order more Hornets to replace it's aging airframes.



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 12:55 PM
link   
a reply to: JIMC5499

It's the Russian take on the F35 which says a lot.

Never a day passes without Russia Today, Sputnik running a story against the F35. They're not knocking the F35 for the benefit of the US & allied taxpayers ... they're doing it because the F35 will be the one aircraft they don't wish to meet in combat.

It's been the same for decades. The then Soviets weeped and wailed about cruise missiles in UK, Pershing 2's in West Germany, they railed against SDI, the MX missile, MIRV's, the Iowa battleships being re-commissioned. If the Russians complain so much it means they're spooked. And to me that means we're in a good place, even though this aircraft is ridiculously expensive.



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 01:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: JIMC5499
I have to wonder how much of the negativity about the F-35 is generated by Boeing sympathizers? Boeing stands to get a lot if it can discredit the F-35. Right now Canada is on the bubble to either commit to the F-35 or fall back on the F/A-18. If the US Navy cuts back on the F-35, it would have to order more Hornets to replace it's aging airframes.

Does it matter?

Canada's decision isn't hinged on media reports about the aircraft. In fact, the F-35 isn't even the cause of deliberation in Canada.

The cause is extremely poor over site over the entire procurement process coupled with a military/government identity crisis.



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 01:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

And what is the F-22 in that situation then?

An 850CSi or an EB110 or a 1998 750iL that had >75% of the electronic complexity that a 2012 car has, but 10-15 years ahead of its time and from a "cost is no option" design philosophy so that most of the methods used to achieve its performance are either out of date or still too expensive/complex for a more "mass market" aircraft?

I wonder if the A-12 or the NATF might have been able to bridge the technologies gap between the F-22 and the F-35, had it been approved/built.



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 01:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Barnalby

Something like that. The F-22 is sort of a bridge, but the F-35 uses a much more complex system than even it uses.



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 01:35 PM
link   
I will freely admit I know next to nothing about the lawn dart arm of the USAF.. always been a heavy guy probably always will.

That said..




The F-35 is generating the air picture, which changes the situation for the AWACS dramatically. It does not need to tell me what I can see better than what I can already see; but it will become more like an airborne air battle manager. And as the F-35 intersects with ground, sea and other air systems, the entire Command and Control (C2) operation changes as well. The new challenge will be to get the right information to the right person at the right time; not just providing point outs on radar contacts like previous fighter/Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) integration.


This quote seems out of place to me... while the individual F-35 pilot may have more information at their fingertips (when all the systems work right and communicate with each other correctly) but to get that information out to others is still going to require people to receive and interpret the information and relay it to other platforms that don't have the capabilities of the F-35.

Or am I reading that wrong? It looks like the AWACS, or some form of it, maybe the rivet joint I dont know will still need to be there as a go between the information the F-35 spits out and the other older platforms..

If I am wrong can someone break it down into dummy crew chief speak for me... crayons and pictures might help..



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 01:47 PM
link   
I'd expect people involved in the F-35 program would say the F-35 is awesome even if they might not think that. Of course LM say it's great and air force say it's great, I bet they'd get a warning or worse if they said any different...



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 02:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aliensun
a reply to: Zaphod58


I'm not going to explain the details, but on seeing the officer's name, I was struck by the memory of how the wife of Capt. Edward J. Ruppelt claimed after his death that he was chosen by the Air Force top brass as the first head of Project Blue Book because he was Jewish, outside the club, and they needed a scapegoat.


They also needed to hide the SR-71, U-2, CORONA, and ??? sightings.



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 02:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Irishhaf

Talon HATE. The F-22 and F-35 will be able to send data between each other, as well as send it to Talon HATE equipped 4th Gen platforms.



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 02:47 PM
link   
a reply to: JimTSpock

I've heard people bitch about programs that were involved in them before. He's exactly right though in that the information in the media and reality are not even close to agreeing.



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 03:22 PM
link   
I know some of the Navy people who are working on the maintenance aspect of the F-35. They are literally writing the manuals that will be used to maintain the aircraft when it gets to the Fleet. They love it. They figure that once it gets past the initial stage it will cut the maintenance hours to flight hours almost in half compared to the Hornet. I'm supposed to go down there in a few months and possibly get an up close look at an F-35.



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 03:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Every time I watch an F-22 demonstration on YouTube, for some reason it reminds me of the Ferrari F40, the Porsche 959, the Bugatti EB110, or the McLaren F1 in a "we may never again see someone try to build something so uncompromisingly aggressive, ambitious, and ahead of its time" sort of way.




top topics



 
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join