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.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

15 F-35s grounded due to supplier mistake

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 16 2016 @ 09:29 PM
link   
Thirteen US and 2 Norwegian F-35s have been grounded after it was found that a supplier used improper insulation on cooling lines. A routine maintenance check found the insulation breaking down, leaving contamination in the fuel system. There are 42 more aircraft on the production line that used parts from the same supplier.

Lockheed uses several suppliers to supply the lines in question. The problem was found in a Depot check at Hill prior to IOC. Ten aircraft are from Hill, four at Luke and one at Nellis.

www.defensenews.com...




posted on Sep, 16 2016 @ 09:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

F-35 bashers arriving in 3 2 1 .



posted on Sep, 16 2016 @ 09:33 PM
link   
a reply to: hutch622

arrrr grrr... f-35 sucks.


arrr ggrrr.... f-16 can fly circles around an f-35.

arrr grrr.... too much money...arrr



posted on Sep, 16 2016 @ 09:33 PM
link   
a reply to: hutch622

Yeah I know. They already are on other sites. Somehow this proves what a POS it is. Don't ask me how, but by some logic it does.



posted on Sep, 16 2016 @ 09:34 PM
link   
Who pays for the refit?



posted on Sep, 16 2016 @ 09:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

That's being worked out but usually the supplier that screwed up replaces the problem part at their expense.



posted on Sep, 16 2016 @ 11:23 PM
link   
It's an avionics cooling line that goes through the wing tanks, specific to the A model. The supplier used insulation that wasn't compatible with fuel, which caused it to degrade.



posted on Sep, 16 2016 @ 11:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

I had that problem with my lawn mower and ethanol.



posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 01:31 AM
link   
F-35-ED, for Expensive Dud.



posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 01:36 AM
link   
a reply to: CharlesT

Right, because a supplier cutting corners means the aircraft is a dud. It sure is watering some eyes and beating every metric the actual users have set for it by miles for a dud.
edit on 9/17/2016 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 01:42 AM
link   
Some folks I know from my Boeing days would say a supplier cutting corners is the same as a saboteur. Pretty scary stuff actually. Any supplier doing that is cutting their own throats in a business sense.



posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 01:45 AM
link   
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

It never ceases to amaze me that suppliers do things like this. Short term profit seems to be the goal instead of more potential contracts.



posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 01:53 AM
link   
a reply to: CharlesT

By every quantifiable measure, the F35 is anything but a dud. Like any other new technology it has teething pains, few if any new military hardware of any complexity are bugless. The only aircraft I can think of right off the top of my head was the WWII era Grumman F6F-3 Hellcat, there was only one upgrade in its service life...the F6F-5, because it was that damned good.

The F35 is going to do just fine, irregardless of skeptics who haven't been following it closely enough...



posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 03:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Phage

That's being worked out but usually the supplier that screwed up replaces the problem part at their expense.


If I was Lockheed I think I would order the parts from another supplier and never do business with them again. In fact being lockheed I bet they can go further and make sure they never see a govt contract. This will prevent that in the future.
edit on 9/17/16 by dragonridr because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 04:14 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Now that doesn't seem accidental at all, if their purpose was to supply the line that was supposed to be compatible with fuel. Why in the blue hell would they not supply the correct parts that are fuel friendly?

Mistake or incompetence?



posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 04:15 AM
link   
a reply to: StratosFear




Mistake or incompetence?


Corner cutting. You left that out.


edit on 9/17/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 06:55 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage New management often starts cutting corners and screws stuff up, that's happened at 2 companies I`ve worked at.Might be the case with the supplier had a change of management.The F35 is going to be fine after the bugs are worked out.



posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 06:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Which would fall under incompetence to me.



posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 06:19 PM
link   
a reply to: StratosFear

Incompetence implies a mistake. A possibility.
Corner cutting implies intent. A possibility.

edit on 9/17/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2016 @ 02:40 AM
link   
a reply to: StratosFear

This kind of stuff happens all the time. Each one of our frontline fighters has been grounded for some reason or another, and no one suspected sabotage. Our industrial complex is more than happy to screw it up themselves.




top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join