And what country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
Some perspective: Maintenance Manhours per Flight Hour:: (Note: For the F-35 this is tracked across the entire worldwide fleet by SPO and contractor and published monthly; legacy fighters figures, esp for F-16, vary according to unit and source.)
F-35A: 4.9 F-35B: 10.5 F-35C: 10.5 F-22: 10.5 at system maturity in 2009; some sources state 43mmh/fh in2015. F-16: 15 to 30 F-15E: 15-20 F-15C: 12-18 F/A-18E/F: 15
The F-35 production line is maxxed out, and the JPO has apparently made the decision, for now, to optimize for production aircraft rather than spares. This directly affects readiness rates across the fleet when broken aircraft have to wait for parts. However, F-35 units overseas near hotspots like Ukraine or Middle East, who presumably have priority for spares, have been reported readiness rates of in the 80% and 90% ranges, versus CONUS where it lags below 60%.
In short, there is no inherent maintenance issue with the F-35 itself, more a production of spares issue.
It is certified to carry AIM-120, AIM-9X, JDAM, Paveway II, SDB I, JSOW, and GAU-22/A gun across all variants, completely meeting the original requirements for air-ground and air-to-air missions, plus the A model is certified to carry internally the B61-12 nuke. The UK ASRAAM is certified for the UK F-35B.The US AGM-158 and the UK Meteor are certified for external carriage; internal carriage integration is underway in Block 4.
And the A model has actually flown combat missions.
The USMC MV-22 Class A mishap rate for FY2015-FY2024 (latest 10 years) is 2.56/100,000 flight hours, lower than the rate for all Marine aircraft of 2.67. The CH-53E Super Stallion in particular has Class A Mishap rate of 3.16. The retired CH-46E (which was replaced by the MV-22) had a historical average rate of 4 to 5.
The USAF CV-22 has a lifetime Class A Mishap rate of 6.00, higher, but it also flies a more demanding special ops profile; special ops MC-130 and AC-130 have higher rates than tactical airlift C-130s.
Since V-22 took first flight in 1989, there have been 67 Class A Mishap fatalities, about half before IOC in 2007 (i.e. still in development) and half after IOC.
In that same time frame the USMC CH-53 had 88 fatalities (not including six lost in combat ops), and the CH-46, which retired in 2015, had 60.
Thanks for injecting some sense into this conversation. I'm so sick of the F-35 haters, who seem to hate any kind of technology newer than their beloved M-14 rifle. They're usually outed as ignorant when they start saying the AR-15/M16 is still unreliable....yeesh people.
Tell me you don't read without telling me you don't read!
Cool. Now breakdown what it was billed to be able to do, and how many of those parameters it's met.
Then do one for cost. Both unit cost, and operating cost.
Those won't be near as fun for you, I promise.
The Thunderjug is a gigantic leap backwards. The only thing it's better-than, is nothing. Having nothing to fill all the roles it's slated to perform would be a problem. Trying to replace 5 or 6 aircraft with one airframe across three services was a quixotic farcical fever-dream, and everything about the Thunderjug shows that, every day.
We just happen to have painted ourselves into that corner, and now we're stuck with it. That doesn't mean it's wonderful. It's just what we've got.
Navy and Marines figured out a few years back that the engine was destroying decks. They came up with a new heat-resistant surface to protect the amphibious assault ship decks. I think all the LHA and LHD ships got the new surface. Not sure if Navy bothered with the LPD and LSD ships because the F-35Bs don't land on those as far as I know.
Fat Amy.
ReplyDeleteDefinitely up there for a resource sucking POS. Hours to days of maintenance for every hour flown. Still not fully certified, so mission limited.
ReplyDeleteOnly surpased in stupidity by the V22
DeleteI completely agree with you. The V-22 "Osprey" is one of the biggest and deadliest federal government fiascos ever followed closely by the F-35.
DeleteChiCom trolls are out in force.
ReplyDeleteSome perspective:
Maintenance Manhours per Flight Hour:: (Note: For the F-35 this is tracked across the entire worldwide fleet by SPO and contractor and published monthly; legacy fighters figures, esp for F-16, vary according to unit and source.)
F-35A: 4.9
F-35B: 10.5
F-35C: 10.5
F-22: 10.5 at system maturity in 2009; some sources state 43mmh/fh in2015.
F-16: 15 to 30
F-15E: 15-20
F-15C: 12-18
F/A-18E/F: 15
The F-35 production line is maxxed out, and the JPO has apparently made the decision, for now, to optimize for production aircraft rather than spares. This directly affects readiness rates across the fleet when broken aircraft have to wait for parts. However, F-35 units overseas near hotspots like Ukraine or Middle East, who presumably have priority for spares, have been reported readiness rates of in the 80% and 90% ranges, versus CONUS where it lags below 60%.
In short, there is no inherent maintenance issue with the F-35 itself, more a production of spares issue.
It is certified to carry AIM-120, AIM-9X, JDAM, Paveway II, SDB I, JSOW, and GAU-22/A gun across all variants, completely meeting the original requirements for air-ground and air-to-air missions, plus the A model is certified to carry internally the B61-12 nuke. The UK ASRAAM is certified for the UK F-35B.The US AGM-158 and the UK Meteor are certified for external carriage; internal carriage integration is underway in Block 4.
And the A model has actually flown combat missions.
The USMC MV-22 Class A mishap rate for FY2015-FY2024 (latest 10 years) is 2.56/100,000 flight hours, lower than the rate for all Marine aircraft of 2.67. The CH-53E Super Stallion in particular has Class A Mishap rate of 3.16. The retired CH-46E (which was replaced by the MV-22) had a historical average rate of 4 to 5.
The USAF CV-22 has a lifetime Class A Mishap rate of 6.00, higher, but it also flies a more demanding special ops profile; special ops MC-130 and AC-130 have higher rates than tactical airlift C-130s.
Since V-22 took first flight in 1989, there have been 67 Class A Mishap fatalities, about half before IOC in 2007 (i.e. still in development) and half after IOC.
In that same time frame the USMC CH-53 had 88 fatalities (not including six lost in combat ops), and the CH-46, which retired in 2015, had 60.
Thanks for injecting some sense into this conversation. I'm so sick of the F-35 haters, who seem to hate any kind of technology newer than their beloved M-14 rifle. They're usually outed as ignorant when they start saying the AR-15/M16 is still unreliable....yeesh people.
DeleteTell me you don't read without telling me you don't read!
Cool.
DeleteNow breakdown what it was billed to be able to do, and how many of those parameters it's met.
Then do one for cost. Both unit cost, and operating cost.
Those won't be near as fun for you, I promise.
The Thunderjug is a gigantic leap backwards. The only thing it's better-than, is nothing. Having nothing to fill all the roles it's slated to perform would be a problem. Trying to replace 5 or 6 aircraft with one airframe across three services was a quixotic farcical fever-dream, and everything about the Thunderjug shows that, every day.
We just happen to have painted ourselves into that corner, and now we're stuck with it. That doesn't mean it's wonderful. It's just what we've got.
Now think about what that exhaust is doing to the deck.
ReplyDeleteNavy and Marines figured out a few years back that the engine was destroying decks. They came up with a new heat-resistant surface to protect the amphibious assault ship decks. I think all the LHA and LHD ships got the new surface. Not sure if Navy bothered with the LPD and LSD ships because the F-35Bs don't land on those as far as I know.
Delete