DefenseTech Military.com
  • Categories
  • Full Archives
  • Monthly Archives
  • About Defense Tech
Subscribe to RSS

About Defense Tech

Defense Tech examines the intersection of technology and defense from every angle and provides analysis on what’s ahead.

Tip Us Off

Tip for Defense Tech?

SEND IT!

It’s Confidential!

Categories

  • ‘Canes
  • Af-Cam
  • Afghan Update
  • Ammo and Munitions
  • Armor
  • Around the Globe
  • Av Week Extra
  • Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
  • Bizarro
  • Blimps
  • Blog Bidness
  • Body Armor Blues
  • Bomb Squad
  • Brownshoes in Action
  • Bubbleheads, etc.
  • Cammo Green
  • Catch the “Buzz”
  • Chem-Bio
  • Civilian Apps
  • Cloak and Dagger
  • Commandos
  • Comms
  • Contingency Ops
  • Cops and Robbers
  • Crazy Ivan
  • Cyber-warfare
  • Data Diving
  • Defense Tech Poll
  • Defense Tech Radio
  • Dissent Tech
  • Door Kickers
  • Drones
  • DT Administrivia
  • Eat DT’s Dust
  • Extra! Extra!
  • Eye on China
  • F-35 Watch
  • Fast Movers
  • FCS Watch
  • Fire for Effect
  • FOS Files
  • Friday Funnies
  • Gadgets and Gear
  • Going Green
  • Grand Ole Osprey
  • Ground Vehicles
  • Guns
  • Homeland Security
  • In the Bubble with Joe Buff
  • In the Weeds with Eric
  • Info War
  • Iraq Diary
  • Jarhead Jazz
  • JSF Watch
  • Just War Theories
  • Lasers and Ray Guns
  • Less-lethal
  • Logistics
  • Los Alamos and Labs
  • M4 Monopoly
  • Medic!
  • Mercs
  • Missiles
  • Money Money Money
  • Most Wanted
  • MRAP Edge
  • Net-Centric
  • Nukes
  • Old Skool
  • Our Shrinking Planet
  • PEO Soldier
  • Planes, Copters, Blimps
  • Podcast
  • Politricks
  • Polmar’s Perspective
  • Popular Mechanics
  • Rapid Fire
  • Raptor Watch
  • Red Team
  • Retro-Futuro
  • Robots
  • Roll Your Own
  • Sabra Tech
  • Ships and Subs
  • Snipertech
  • Soldier Systems
  • Space
  • Special Ops
  • Star Wars
  • Strategery
  • Stray Trons
  • Tactical Development
  • Terror Tech
  • The Deadlies
  • The Defense Biz
  • The Peoples’ Site
  • The Sunday Paper
  • The Tanker Tango
  • The View from Av Week
  • Those Nutty Norks
  • Training and Sims
  • Trimble on the Case
  • Uncategorized
  • Video Lounge
  • War Update
  • Ward’z Wonderz
  • You can run…

Archives

  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003
  • September 2003
  • August 2003
  • July 2003
  • June 2003
  • May 2003
  • April 2003
  • March 2003
  • February 2003
  • January 2003

Home » JSF Watch » When Will the F-35 Return to Flight?

When Will the F-35 Return to Flight?

F-35.jpg

Following an enforced six-month lay-off, Lockheed Martin is “champing at the bit” to get the F-35 Lightning II back into the air, an ambition it is aiming to fulfil this week.

As of the end of last month company officials were targeting Dec. 4 to restart flight trials of AA-1, an F-35A. The aircraft has been on the ground since May, initially as a result of an electrical problem, and latterly with engine issues.

The planned return of the AA-1 to the flight test program will be quickly followed by flight tests of company’s Boeing 737 systems testbed-aircraft, the Cooperative Avionics Testbed (CATBird). The CATBird was slated to fly as early as Dec. 5. The aircraft will eventually be fitted with a complete F-35 sensor suite.

Tom Burbage, Lockheed Martin vice-president and F-35 general manager, says the circuitry responsible for the electrical problem has been redesigned. This delay, however, was compounded by a “manufacturing defect in an engine blade” resulting in the need for checks to the Pratt & Whitney F-135 engine.

Aircraft AA-1 had been flown on 19 test-flights when the electrical issue was encountered, May 3. A successful return to flight this week would see the aircraft go on to be flown from Forth Worth through March 2008, when it would be transferred to Edwards AFB, Calif. for a series of trials lasting around a month.

The initial AA-1 flights will be used to examine whether the electrical arcing issue at high-altitude has been satisfactorily dealt with. The aircraft will be flown at various flight levels up to 40,000 feet to ensure the anomaly does not recur.

Read more from Aviation Week about the F-35’s return to flight at Military​.com.

– Christian

Share |

December 4th, 2007 | JSF Watch | 269215 Comments »http://defensetech.org/2007/12/04/when-will-the-f-35-return-to-flight/When+Will+the+F-35+Return+to+Flight%3F2007-12-04+12%3A26%3A53Ward You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

« « The Downside of End-Strength Increases | What a Successful D-5 Test Could Mean » »

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. Stephen Trimble says:
    December 4, 2007 at 8:45 am

    When? Er, today.

    Reply
  2. SMSgt Mac says:
    December 4, 2007 at 8:58 am

    It’s why we call it ‘Flight Test’… and it will fly when everybody involved wants it to.

    Reply
  3. DC2 Jennings says:
    December 4, 2007 at 10:31 am

    Dump this plane while we still can and use the money to get more F-22s.
    How much more money will this plane cost before it is in full production?
    DC2

    Reply
  4. Grandjester says:
    December 4, 2007 at 10:49 am

    That sucking sound you hear is millions of tax dollars going down the toilet.

    Reply
  5. whatmeworry says:
    December 4, 2007 at 12:42 pm

    I do remember a few years ago when everyone’s pinup , the F-22, was having its testing problems and budget woes. Look at her now! She’s all grown up and giving everyone the come hither look.
    The F-35 will be fine. Of course it might cost alot more to get her fine.…

    Reply
  6. f35future says:
    December 4, 2007 at 12:50 pm

    “That sucking sound you hear is millions of tax dollars going down the toilet.“
    … going down to New Orleans?

    Reply
  7. Nicholas says:
    December 4, 2007 at 5:14 pm

    I hope fixing the problems dont take as long as fixing the problems on the Osprey! NOW THAT WAS A WASTE OF TAX MONEY!!!

    Reply
  8. Wayne says:
    December 4, 2007 at 9:50 pm

    I guess no one here remembers how many problems the F-14 had early in its career, how the F-15, F-16, F/A-18, etc, etc, etc, all had problems early in their programs too. The F-35 is the leading edge of technology, so it will have stutters as those technologies are fielded. The next bomber will too, as will the next generation of fighters once the F-22 and F-35 mature and begin to be eclipsed by new technology.
    And the real source of that sucking sound is the empty cranium of those who let politics and their own bias trump truth and historical information.

    Reply
  9. anonymous says:
    December 4, 2007 at 10:25 pm

    Now trying for Dec 7.

    Reply
  10. matt hood says:
    December 5, 2007 at 7:14 am

    The war in Iraq is not worth 3 trillion dollars to make a point for Bush in history. His father would have invaded Iraq if he had received a second term as President. Clinton got impeached because he refused to remove Saddam on his watch; while the Bush right wing, who were hiding out in their fascist tax exempt foundation to slander Bill Clinton . Privatizing the Middle East and Iraq has been, since the cold war, the goal of the Wall Street CIA and the Rockefeller family since oil was found in the middle east. It was has a means to avoid paying taxes on American soil. The CIA program Operation Mocking Bird is in full swing to deceive this nation.

    Reply
  11. DC2 Jennings says:
    December 5, 2007 at 7:51 am

    Easy there Matt, don’t forget to take your meds.
    Wayne I agree with you except for one comment. The F-35 is not the leading edge technology, the F-22 is. The F-35 is a strike aircraft cut in the mold of the A-7, F-16, etc.
    We do not need the F-35 as much as we need more F-22s. I will continue to say that on this blog until the my breath leaves me.
    And for those that think the Navy needs this plane, you might want to conisder how the Navy loathes single engined aircraft. I guarantee you they would rather have the F-18E/F over the F-35.
    This plane will cost just less than the F-22 does now once all of this is said and done. And I don’t know if the carrier version (F-35C) will ever meet requirements.
    DC2

    Reply
  12. SrA Sabo says:
    December 5, 2007 at 10:04 am

    I think they should be focused on UAVs because they are already beginning to make some manned missions obsolete, and it won’t be long at all before the technology is improved and closes the gap completely.
    Sadly, I think that both the F-22 and F-35 are going to go the way of the B-47 and F-100.

    Reply
  13. JT Strong says:
    December 5, 2007 at 10:59 pm

    Some background: When the F-22/F-23 program began, the mantra was “not a pound for air-to-ground.” The program was headed by a Air Force senior officer, with his deputy being a Naval senior officer. When the air-to-mud issue became an absolute for the Air Force, the Navy withdrew from the program, including withdrawing it’s senior Navy program deputy. Obviously, the Navy was looking for a stealthy air-to-mud airframe. The Navy then chose to upgrade the F/A-18, including a number of steath-fixes, to fill the void until what became the JSF/F-35 became available. Because the Navy has not in the past bought single-engine aircraft is not so much a decision based on descression, but one based on technology. Those of use in the business recall that the pacific wasn’t a two-engine pond until recently with the introduction of high performance twin-jet platforms. Now that is common place. Well, the single-engine fighter blower has also come of age, finally. SWome of us are also long enough in the teeth to recall the numerous cases in the past when geniuses (specifically someone whose initials are RM) tried to make multi-role aircraft the only way to go. It was a nice idea at the time, but the technology hadn’t yet arrived to make the idea work, and we got the F-111 and the F-4. With the arrival of the F-15/16/18 series, the concept started to work. Now we are developing the next generation of aircraft which are sophisticating that capability. However, we have not quite reached the air-breathing ultimate: The full-scale UAV fighter/bomber that can, because of not having a human aboard, can absolutely dazzel the competition with capabilities like 20-g (more ?)instantaneous turns. When air-to-air missiles can make 36-g turns, and they do now, the trick is to either hide from the launcher — read stealth — or be able to out turn the S.O.B., or both. Granteed that two of lessons learned from Star Wars was that fighters will always have pilots, and there will always be a GIB to feed the monkey, but the handwriting is well and truly on the wall: Electrons have already replaced the GIB (read and weep F-15 GIBs); and the F-22/F-35 airframes are very possibly the end of manned fighter-flight. Maybe the greatest insult to fighter pilots has yet to come: it appears that Nuke-capable bombers will have a man aboard for a long time to come. The question hefre is whether or not that man will be a pilot or a mission manager. Say, what?

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

NOTE: Comments are limited to 2500 characters and spaces.

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement

    Recent Articles
    • EADS Tanker, Not Dead Yet
    • JFCOM’s Mattis Pushes Light IW Aircraft
    • And, the Vertical Landing
    • NLOS-LS Missile Fail Could Impact Navy’s LCS
    • JFCOM’s JOE Whacks Defense Industry
    • New F-35B Hover Video
    • China’s Shipbuilding in a Regional Context
    • Debating the Pros and Cons of LCS
    • Bigger, Badder IEDs in Afghanistan
    • Petraeus to SASC Today; Israel-Palestine to Come Up? (Updated)
    Recent Comments
    • JFCOM’s Mattis Pushes Light IW Aircraft
      Have'nt we built thousands of this in WWI and...
      roland
    • Bigger, Badder IEDs in Afghanistan
      I'm enlisting in the Navy in July. We need more...
      Curtis
    • JFCOM’s Mattis Pushes Light IW Aircraft
      The PA 48 Enforcer modernized version of the...
      GI Joe
    • Iranian Cyber Warfare Threat Assessment
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...
      pasargad22
    • JFCOM’s Mattis Pushes Light IW Aircraft
      I will concede timeliness will never be satisfied;...
      TMB
    • JFCOM’s Mattis Pushes Light IW Aircraft
      RE: Mac, has the Air Force ever asked the Army...
      SMSgt Mac
    • JFCOM’s Mattis Pushes Light IW Aircraft
      Question…with modern equipment like laser...
      gmanaz
    • Army Fast Tracks GPS Mortar Round
      SHOT OVER,,,,Wow you now have a 120mm mortar that...
      Bob Voelsing
    • JFCOM’s Mattis Pushes Light IW Aircraft
      why don't we go to the boneyards and museums and...
      Jim
    • EADS Tanker, Not Dead Yet
      Why take American when the foreign one is better? Enough of...
      american1776
  • Channels:Military.com | Military Benefits | Military News | Off Duty |Join the Military | Military Education | Veteran Jobs | Military Money |Military Deals | Military Family | Military Community
  • Military.com Network:Military.com | MilBlogging | Defense Tech | DoD Buzz |SpouseBuzz | Fred's Place | GI Bill Express
  • Services: Army | Navy | Air Force | Marine Corps |Coast Guard | National Guard | Military Spouse
  • About Military.com About Us | Advertise With Us | Press | Affiliate Program |Monster Network | Help | Feedback | Privacy Policy |User Agreement| © 2010 Military Advantage