In an effort to be in compliance with GDPR we are providing you with the latest documentation about how we collect, use, share and secure your information, we want to make you aware of our updated privacy policy here
Enter your name and email address below to receive our newsletter.
12/2/2012: The crew of the Coast Guard Cutter Confidence offloaded 2,245 pounds of marijuana, with a wholesale value of approximately $2 million, at Coast Guard Station Port Canaveral, Sunday.
The crews of the Coast Guard Cutters Confidence and Dauntless intercepted a 30-foot vessel suspected of smuggling narcotics Aug. 17, south of Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
The ceremony to declare the USS Enterprise inactive was held yesterday.
After a glorious career, and after shaping many innovations in Naval history, the USS Enterprise enters into history.
USS Enterprise over the years. Graphic Credit: Huntington Ingalls
It is an end of an era, but a new one is dawning in US maritime history.
The christening of the USS America earlier this year was the other event, which correlated with the retirement of the USS Enterprise, provided the twin pillars of the future.
Eventually, the USS Ford will “replace” the USS Enterprise.
The Enterprise Carrier Strike group (CSG) sails through the Atlantic Ocean in formation. Credit: USN Forces Central Command Public Affairs 5/7/2006
But it is an entirely new ship which when combined with kinds of assets already planned for the USS America can shape the next revolution in US maritime operations.
If the Ford were to be equipped as if it was the USS Enterprise, the entire point of the historic transition would be lost.
As I wrote earlier about the USS America:
It is not often that a new ship of the line is christened. And when it is, thoughts of how it might be used, where it might operate and how it might make new naval history are part of the excitement.
This was clearly evident at the christening of the USS America, the fourth ship of that name, in Pascagoula, Mississippi on October 20th.
This ship is not only the lead ship in a new class but will integrate the newest aviation of the USMC-USN team aboard a single operational platform at sea.
It will operate F-35 Bravos, Ospreys and CH-53Ks in the years to come. And the first ship will operate out of San Diego, and be part of the Pacific century.
Not far away, F-35 Bravos are being prepared for action in Eglin AFB. And in a confluence of events, two new F-35Bs landed at Eglin – one British and one USMC – the day before the christening.
Although called an LHA, it is not. Rather than being a Landing Helicopter Assault ship, it is flagship for 21st century operations. And these operations will be shaped by the need to operate at greater distance, and to strike with aircraft with significantly greater capability than the aircraft they are replacing.
The Osprey and the F-35 Bravo can operate at greater distance, speed and lethality than what they are replacing. The 360-degree aircraft – the F-35B – will provide along with its sister assets a change as big as that for which Admiral Sims and Admiral Halsey planned for with the introduction of the original aircraft carriers prior to World War II.
The future will deploy soon, and rethinking its impact on the fleet and re-shaping the entire concepts of operations for the Pacific century is upon us.
And the good news is that many of our allies are joining us in this approach in other parts of the world, notably the Italians and the Brits are adding F-35Bs to their warships and may well add Ospreys in the future.
Ironically, the USS Enterprise, in its final tour, participated in the transition as a key element participating in Bold Alligator 2012.
As the Enterprise moved away from the assault phase, the large deck amphibious ships played the direct air assault role presaging an element of the historical transition.
2012-11-30 Earlier Second Line of Defense had a wide-ranging discussion with Don Kinard of Lockheed Martin, one of the best production specialists in the aviation business today.
In that conversation we focused on the approach to building wings for the F-35.
In our most recent visit to the F-35 plant, we discussed the evolving production process and its maturation.
Key subjects were:
The role of software in production,
the feedback from the F-35 pilots,
the impacts of building three variants of a single aircraft on a single production line,
and the impacts of the learning curve on building the aircraft.
We visited the plant after our time with the Marines in Yuma, so the role of pilots and operations was in the forefront of our minds and a key part of the discussion as well.
SLD: How is the production process maturing certa the end of 2012?
Kinard: We will have completed 30 F-35s in 2012. We are scheduled to build 43 next year. There are around 40-50 pilots who have now flown the aircraft and have given us very positive and important feedback on the plane.
And the software for the operation of the basic aircraft, including combat systems, is 85% fully operational.
We have delivered a total of 41aircraft right now. We’ve got about 100 in work worldwide, of which 80 are in the factory.
F-35 A in final tests before leaving the FAL, November 2012. Lockheed Martin Fort Worth Texas Photo by Angel DelCueto
SLD: Could we discuss software for a moment?
Many folks don’t realize how mature and stable the software in the plane is and that is due in part to the central role which software plays in the production process. Could you discuss this aspect of the plane and its production?
Kinard: You are exactly right. Software and software maturity is central to the production process.
You don’t hear much that for the most part, software availability has is always supporting the production line. So, we have had power on software when we’ve needed it, and we’ve had flight-ready software when we needed it. We’ve had very few situations where that wasn’t the case.
We’re also seeing a lot of stabilization of our supply base via the use of common software throughout the program.
Software availability and maturity is a big deal to production.
We power up the jets in final assembly and that is software driven.
We run the jets through functional tests before they ever leave the building. Our software loads, which are done in final assembly, and the compatibility of all the systems is an important part of the production process itself.
When we get out to the run stations and we start engine runs, they’re basically validating that the aircraft and all the software works the way it’s supposed to.
So software is a huge issue for us, and software maturity is a huge issue for us.
The fact that we have many software laboratories and the fact that we have distributed avionics in the airplane has allowed those systems to mature.
On legacy programs, you couldn’t always test the radar separate from the CNI, separate from the EW, separate from whatever.
But here because of the extensive laboratories and the way the software architecture is designed, I can test the systems with suppliers, I can test them in the labs, and when I put them on the airplane, the systems work together.
I can’t move my aircraft unless all the systems and all that software work, too.
SLD: Let us talk about the learning curve and the impact of having three planes built on the same line on cross learning.
F-35 Bravo on the FAL, November 2012. Lockheed Martin Fort Worth Texas Photo by Angel DelCueto
Kinard: From the manufacturing point of view, in terms of where we were with the very first aircraft, we’re down about two-thirds in touch labor. We’re a third of what we built the very first aircraft.
The commonality across the variants is an important variable in impacting on learning for each variant as well.
The missions systems are 100 percent common on all three variants. Because of this commonality we’re getting maturity a lot earlier.
If you look at the overall learning curve, we’ve actually come down, with three variants what we would call a world class, 70 percent learning curve. A learning curve means as I double the production build number (4 aircraft to 8 aircraft for example), the cost drops by 30 percent (70% of the cost).
So, the fourth aircraft is 70 percent of the second aircraft. The eighth aircraft is 70 percent of the fourth aircraft. And we’ve been coming down that curve with three variants, really, since the beginning of the program.
SLD: And the impact of cross learning across the variants?
Kinard: Because the Navy is coming in last among the three they are starting at a point in the learning curve significantly different than if they were building an aircraft just for themselves.
Because we’re building the other variants together with the CTOL, we’re getting a combined learning curve for those aircraft that you wouldn’t see if you were just building them by themselves.
If you were off in some other place, another factory, you wouldn’t have the commonality, and you wouldn’t have a learning curve. I would say that CVs are being dragged down a path by the other aircraft, down a very excellent learning curve.
And frankly, the challenge of building three variants on a single line was one, which has been significant. As a manufacturer, I was not certain that the three variants would be able to come down a common learning curve because structurally, the parts are different.
But the manufacturing plan was designed to be is the same in each station/area regardless of the variant.
And all the avionics, which are—that frankly, the costly part of the aircraft, are all common.
And with regard to the other aspects of the plane, commonality across the vehicle systems is high as well around 60%, while structural commonality is less than 20% due to the differing missions and design requirements of each variant.
SLD: Many people do not realize how much the F-35 is like an Airbus or now the evolving Boeing production model, where the final assembly line mates core subsystems and does not assemble parts. Could you discuss this aspect?
Kinard: Lockheed Martin only has about 30 percent of the program. Seventy percent of the program is out of the supply base, and so of that 30 percent, a fraction of that is actually touch labor.
It’s really not where the money is, the money is in the supply base, the avionics in particular. People are constantly talking to us about affordability and touch labor reduction.
So, it’s a very visible part of the program.
But again, I think the bottom line is we’re coming down in the amount of touch labor needed to build the aircraft—as good of learning curves as we’ve ever come down here in Fort Worth.
From the manufacturing point of view, from the very first aircraft, we’re down about two-thirds in touch labor. We’re a third of what we built the very first aircraft from a touch labor standpoint.
SLD: There are a growing number of pilots who have flown the F-35, around 50 to date. We believe that given the nature of the aircraft, the “testing” by the pilots in operations will be a significant input to the evolution of the program, especially when one considers the fact that this is a software upgradeable aircraft. What is your perspective with regard to the pilot impact?
Kinard: Unfortunately, the views of pilots are not getting as much public visibility as they should.
The reaction of the pilots has been exceptionally positive. These are no shrinking violets but they have given us a steady stream of positive feedback.
And Engineers and Pilots look at flight test differently.
Engineering thinks about it in discreet intervals of proving capabilities. That’s not the way the pilots think about it. That’s why it’s so exciting about the pilots who tell us they love it, who say hey, this is cool. And who want more. I want to fly over here, I want to do this, I want to do that. That’s the cycle, which will drive further development of the aircraft.
This is not your HUD (heads up display), this is not your dials and gauges, airplane. This aircraft is designed to give the pilot the information they need, in a helmet format, which by the way is working much better than advertised in the media per the pilot inputs.
Well, frankly I think we’re fooling ourselves, even though we have lots of pilots around here, to think that we are going to sit back in our desks here in engineering or manufacturing, understanding what that really is going to be like to fly and develop the missions and the capabilities with the technology.
Introducing a new aircraft is a process that will take time and development, which utilizes the pilots and the engineers.
On our visit to the Fort Worth FAL in November 2012, we walked the factory floor after our visit to Yuma in preparation for the arrival of planes for the F-35 squadron there.
During the visit, we saw several F-35Bs for the Yuma squadron(s) being built or prepared for delivery.
The photos show other planes in process of construction as well as BF-38 and AF-52 beginning the final assembly process.
2012-11-21 Not surprisingly, the local media in Arizona covered the event while the national media was largely absent.
Sen. John McCain, Gov. Jan Brewer and other officials were on hand for the special ceremony at the base. After three speeches, two of the jets landed at the base. They were flown by the first members of the Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 121.
“This aircraft will outperform any other aircraft in the world for many many years ahead,” McCain said.
The F-35B would replace Cold War-era aircraft such as the F/A-18 Hornet and AV-8B Harrier. The first F-35B arrived Friday, and 15 more are coming during the next year. The Defense Department has pumped $500 million into upgrading facilities, hangars and runways at the Yuma base.
“It’s good for our economy,” Brewer said. “It’s good for our pride and it’s certainly good for our freedom. So this is a great day for everyone.”
In the first photo, a KC-130J Hercules with Marine Aerial Refueler Transport Squadron 252, Marine Medium Tiltrotor Squadron 261 (Reinforced), 24h Marine Expeditionary Unit, flies over Djibouti City after conducting aerial refueling training Sep. 23, 2012.The training consisted of MV-22B Ospreys and AV-8B Harriers conducting aerial refueling with the 24th MEU’s KC-130J Hercules aircraft to practice the skills needed for long-range flight operations. The 24th MEU was deployed with the Iwo Jima Amphibious Ready Group as a theater reserve and crisis response force for U.S. Central Command in the U.S. Navy’s 5th Fleet area of responsibility.
In the second and third photos, an MV-22B Osprey connects to the refueling hose of a KC-130J Hercules, during aerial refueling training Sept. 23, 2012. The Ospreys and KC-130J belong to Marine Medium Tiltrotor Squadron 261 (Reinforced), the aviation combat element for the 24th Marine Expeditionary Unit, and conducted aerial refueling training to practice the skills needed for long-range flight operations.
In the fourth photo, an MV-22B Osprey and AV-8B Harriers, both with Marine Medium Tiltrotor Squadron 261 (Reinforced), 24th Marine Expeditionary Unit, fly in formation after conducting aerial refueling training operations, Sept 23, 2012.
In the final photo, an MV-22B Osprey, front, and AV-8B Harriers, both with Marine Medium Tiltrotor Squadron 261 (Reinforced), 24th Marine Expeditionary Unit, fly in formation after conducting aerial refueling training operations, Sept 23, 2012.
An interesting possibility going forward would be to make an Osprey a refueler.
The impact on operations for the USN-USMC team would be significant.
2012-11-19 According to a Lockheed Martin Press Release:
An F-35A Lightning II conventional takeoff and landing (CTOL) aircraft rapidly expanded its high angle of attack (AOA) test envelope to its 50 degree limit in only four flights during recent flight testing here.
F-35A test aircraft are limited to AOAs of 20 degrees until their controllability is proven at a higher AOA limit of 50 degrees.
The ability to rapidly progress to the maximum AOA indicates a sound aerodynamic and flight control system design.
High AOA testing will continue on the F-35A for several months testing the capabilities of all design loadings and the flight control system.
As one source has indicated about such testing:
Controlled flight at high angles of attack (AOAs) provides a modern fighter aircraft with the ability to turn rapidly, providing enhanced nose-pointing capability. The ability to accurately point the nose of the aircraft in a timely manner is the basis for handling qualities criteria and ratings.
Patrick C. Stoliker and John T. Bosworth, Evaluation of High-Angle-of-Attack
Handling Qualities for the X-31A Using Standard Evaluation Maneuvers (NASA, 1996).
And as a 1991 Air Force Test Pilot School Report noted:
From the designer to the pilot, everyone associated with the flying qualities of high performance military aircraft, particularly the fighter or attack variety, is or should be aware of the importance of the high angle of attack flight regime. It is here that the aircraft will spend a significant amount of its time when performing the mission for which it was designed. It is here that the aircraft must display its most outstanding performance.
It is also here that the aircraft, when pushed beyond its limits of controllability, can seemingly defy all laws of physics and principles of flight with which its surprised and often bewildered pilot is acquainted. The frequency of inadvertent loss of control at high angle of attack is such that many combat aircraft pilots are becoming firmly convinced that all pilots may be divided into two categories: those who have departed controlled flight, and those who will. Most thoroughly convinced are those pilots who fall into the former category. The unfortunate fact concerning departure from controlled flight at high angle of attack is that many aircraft and pilots are lost each year due to failure to recover from the out-of-control flight condition.
The circumstances surrounding the losses are varied. Departures from controlled flight may occur unintentionally during high-g maneuvers or intentionally during a nose-high deceleration to zero airspeed in an attempt to gain an advantage over an opponent in combat maneuvering; the aircraft may spin and the gyration be identified too late for recovery or a steep spiral may be mistakenly identified as a spin, causing recovery controls to be misapplied. Whatever the circumstances, departures from controlled flight result all too often in catastrophe. For this reason, test pilots in particular must be familiar with every facet of the high angle-of-attack flight regime.
In what was history in the making, the first F-35 Lightning II, also known as the Joint Strike Fighter, landed at Marine Corps Air Station Yuma on Friday afternoon.
Marine pilot Maj. Aric Liberman arrived at the air station at approximately 1 p.m., having flown in from Lockheed Martin’s production plant in Fort Worth, Texas.
“The delivery of VMFA-121’s first F-35B is a tremendous milestone for our country, the Marine Corps, Marine Corps Air Station Yuma, Marine Aircraft Group 13, 3rd Marine Air Wing, the hard-working Marines of VMFA-121 and the city of Yuma. This marks the transition to the next generation of aircraft for the U.S. military and our Marine Corps.,” said VMFA-121 commanding officer Lt. Col. Jeffrey Scott.
F-35B lands at MCAS Yuma. Credit Photo: Yuma Sun
The F-35B is the variant of the Joint Strike Fighter designed for use by U.S. Marine Corps as well as the international partners of the United Kingdom and Italy. The fighter jet is capable of short take-offs and vertical landings, and is able to be used on amphibious ships, ski-jump aircraft carriers and expeditionary airfields.
The F-35B is slated to replace the Marine Corps’ F/A-18 Hornet, AV-8B Harrier and EA-6B Prowler.
An additional F-35 is expected to arrive each month until a full squadron is stationed at the base. The squadron expects to have an entire squadron of planes by late spring or early summer. The total transition from old aircraft to new aircraft and personnel for the F-35 squadrons is scheduled for 2020.
As the home of the first F-35 fighters in the nation, MCAS Yuma will get five squadrons each with 16 aircraft, and one operational test and evaluation squadron of eight aircraft. These 88 aircraft will replace Yuma’s four existing squadrons of 56 AV-8B Harriers.
“Being the first operational F-35 squadron in the world is another historic moment in Marine aviation, and the Green Knights are proud to be chosen to lead the way into the future of military aviation,” Scott said. “I have no doubt the legendary Green Knight Joe Foss is smiling down on VMFA-121 and the Marine Corps.”
The next squadron to receive its new planes will be VMA-211, which lost six of its Harrier jets during an insurgent attack in September in Afghanistan.
MCAS Yuma has been a very busy place the past two years as it has prepared for the arrival of the new aircraft, pilots and crews. About $400 million has been invested in the construction of infrastructure so far.
In total, as much as $500 million could be allotted to the air station by 2015, including $100 million in 2013. Some future projects over the next three years include a Security Operations building and new Combat Aircraft Loading apron.
Among the already completed and near-completed projects are two new hangars, which cost about $38 million each. While specifically been designed for the F-35B, the hangars reportedly can be used to maintain other aircraft if needed.
The first JSF hangar was occupied on Aug. 20 by VMFA-121. Until recently the squadron had been based at MCAS Miramar in California and flew the F/A-18D.
The third and fourth hangars are in design, with construction expected to be completed in May 2014. The fifth JSF hangar has not been awarded yet, but the base expects to demolish two of the older fixed-wing hangars and replace them with the fifth F-35 hangar within the next five years.
Also as part of the build-up, construction on an Intermediate Maintenance Activity building and a F-35 Simulator Facility were recently completed.
Construction is also under way on a new Field-Carrier Landing Practice training facility on the Barry M. Goldwater Range. The project is expected to be completed by July 2013.
Since MCAS Yuma is the home of the first fully operational F-35 squadrons, many units from all branches of the military that will transition to the new aircraft are expected to spend time training here.
Temco Tool in Manchester has been working with BAE Systems in Nashua on the F-35 since 2001. The high-precision machine shop produces antenna arrays and other finely engineered components for the stealth aircraft designed to be the fighter jet for the new millennium.
Over the decade, the contracts have added up to millions of dollars for the relatively small BAE supplier, with about 45 employees. At this point, F-35 work accounts for only 20 percent of the activity at the Holt Avenue machine shop.
“With ramp-up to full production, that 20 percent would probably go up to 40 percent, and we’d probably add another five to 10 people to start with,” said Temco President Norm Gagne.
While the F-35 has poured millions of dollars into the New Hampshire economy during its 10-year development phase, the ramp-up to full production, as Gagne calls it, is the brass ring of economic development for the Granite State, given the key role played by BAE, the trickle-down effect for its many subcontractors and suppliers, and the multiplier effect when all those dollars flow back into the retail and service economy.
But at this point, no one is sure what a full ramp-up will mean.
“The numbers go up and down every day,” Gagne said. “How many the Air Force wants, how many the Marines want. There are a lot of other countries ordering them, as well. This is an international thing.”
The program appears stalled at the end of its development stage, waiting for key political and economic decisions to be made in the United States and abroad to set the stage for full production.
According to Lockheed-Martin, the general contractor for the project, the key to affordability for the F-35 is to ramp up to full-rate production and build about 200 to 220 of the jets each year. At that rate, it would take well over 15 years to build and deploy the 2,443 jets projected for the U.S. military and the roughly 700 projected for purchase by Canada, Australia, Turkey, Italy, Norway, Denmark, Netherlands and the United Kingdom, along with possible sales to Israel, Japan, Singapore, South Korea and Spain.
The jet comes in three variations – one that lands on an airstrip; one that lands on an aircraft carrier; and one that takes off and lands vertically like the British Harrier Jump Jet. It’s taken nearly 10 years of research, development and testing to get 43 jets into the air today, none of which has been deployed for military service.
“All of the aircraft that have been delivered are being used for testing or training,” said Deb Norton, program director of the F-35 program at BAE in Nashua. “There are no aircraft that have been delivered to the services for deployment.”
The 10-year development phase itself has been an economic boon for New Hampshire, but the real payoff, in terms of creating well-paying manufacturing positions, will come with the full-scale production, Norton said. “If you look at it from an economic perspective, the development projects employ the engineers,” she said. “The production programs employ the assemblers and test techs.”
The research and development years, from 2004 to 2011, generated $287 million in salaries at BAE. If the jet went into full-scale production at currently projected rates, it would bring $1 billion in salaries to BAE from 2012 to 2032. BAE suppliers in New Hampshire have so far benefited from $38 million in contracts from 2004 to 2011, and they stand to see $136 million in contracts over the next 20 years.
Final decisions about the jet project will affect the employees at BAE, the state’s largest manufacturing employer, and workers at BAE’s many subcontractors, including Temco in Manchester, Technical Research and Manufacturing in Bedford or Linear & Metric in Londonderry.
“The program plays a major role in the economy of New Hampshire, not just through BAE Systems, but the dozens of suppliers in the state,” said Jeffrey J. Rose, director of public affairs for BAE in Nashua.
Tense negotiations between Lockheed-Martin and the Pentagon, decisions to be made in foreign capitals and congressional debates in the months ahead are likely to determine just how big a role that will be over the next 20 years.
