This site may earn chapter commissions from the links on this folio. Terms of utilize.

The Pentagon has released its end-of-year progress report on the F-35, and once once again, the news isn't very skillful. This is nothing new for the F-35, which has been bombarded by poor performance reviews, cost overruns, and straight discipline to criticism by President-elect Donald Trump.

On paper, the F-35 is supposed to complete its System Development and Demonstration (SDD) and begin its Initial Operational Examination and Evaluation (IOT&Due east) by August, 2017. SDD certification means the shipping is in a mature state of development with demonstrated capabilities in alive-fire exercises. IOT&E refers to "Dedicated operational exam and evaluation conducted on production, or production representative articles, to decide whether systems are operationally effective and suitable, and which supports the decision to go on Beyond Depression Charge per unit Initial Production (BLRIP)."

I'm not saying that all delayed projects fail -- but these were cutting-edge graphics when the first video game featuring the F-35 shipped in 1997.

I'k not saying that all delayed projects fail — but these were cutting-edge graphics when the offset video game featuring the F-35 shipped in 1997.

The Joint Strike Fighter (F-35) has been in SDD since 2001 and was expected to complete that process this year. That's no longer going to happen. Instead, the report indicates the F-35 " will non be able to kickoff IOT&E with total combat capability until late CY18 or early CY19, at the soonest." Here are some of the new reasons why:

  • Technology and system improvements have been rolled out to the F-35 program in what are known equally "blocks." Cake 3F mission systems and evolution testing aren't expected to be complete until July, 2018. Cake 3F weapon testing and integration is besides well behind schedule. The F-35B variant (that's the short-takeoff and vertical-landing version developed for the Marines) won't receive its flight envelope Block 3F full upgrade until the centre of 2018 if the current product schedule manages to hold;
  • At that place accept been further delays to gun testing on all 3 platforms and recently discovered "gunsight deficiencies" take delayed this testing also. The four-butt, 25mm GAU-22/A cannon that the F-35 relies on also carries a laughable amount of ammunition — just 182 rounds for the F-35A, or 220 rounds in an external pod for the F-35B and F-35C. The A-ten Thunderbolt 2 carries 1,174 rounds for its 30mm GAU-8/A, while even the F-16's 20mm M61A1 Vulcan 6-barrel rotary cannon packs 511 rounds;
  • The F-35 has an extremely sophisticated computer system for managing mission payloads and hardware bandy-outs, and estimating when various components take reached end-of-life. The organization mostly doesn't work yet. The Autonomic Logistics Data System is at present expected to be set up by mid-2018. Similarly, Mission Data Loads — mission-specific target and sensor information loaded for item types of operations — aren't expected to be available until June, 2018.

The next few points are worth quoting in their entirety:

  • Significant, well-documented deficiencies; for hundreds of these, the program has no plan to adequately fix and verify with flight exam within SDD; although information technology is common for programs to accept unresolved deficiencies later on development, the program must appraise and mitigate the cumulative effects of these remaining deficiencies on F-35 effectiveness and suitability prior to finalizing and fielding Block 3F (emphasis added);
  • Overall ineffective operational performance with multiple key Block 3F capabilities delivered to engagement, relative to planned IOT&Due east scenarios, which are based on various fielded threat laydown;
  • Connected low aircraft availability and no indications of significant improvement, especially for the early on production lot IOT&East aircraft;
  • Delays in completing the required all-encompassing and time-consuming modifications to the fleet of operational test aircraft which, if not mitigated with an executable plan and contract, could significantly delay the beginning of IOT&Due east.

Reaping the whirlwind of concurrency

Part of the reason the F-35'southward evolution costs and deployment times take exploded into such a boondoggle is because the Pentagon was smoking cleft when it approved the aircraft's development strategy. Normally, we develop military machine hardware by building prototypes and fine-tuning capabilities and systems earlier nosotros build those systems into shipping. With the F-35, the regime embraced the idea of building hardware while we had no idea how to implement its capabilities. Imagine breaking footing on a 200-story skyscraper if you had only a vague thought how to build anything above 120 stories. You'd be assuming that whatever techniques are required for constructing a 200-story building can be easily retrofitted into your 120-story model. If information technology turns out they tin can't be, you're going to consume the mother of all development overruns and delays while you retrofit the 120-story building for whatever improvements are required to finish it.

F35-FMC2

These are non groovy numbers. Even grading on a curve.

That's more than-or-less what the Pentagon did with the F-35, and the report makes it clear but how stupid it were for trying it. Above, you lot tin meet the F-35'south stats across each variant (Standard, STVOL, catapult-assisted). MC ways Mission Capable, or the percentage of F-35'south of that variant that tin can fly any mission, while FMC means Fully Mission Capable, or the percentage of F-35's that can wing all intended missions. FMC adequacy varies depending on which "Block" the fighter belongs to, but while later fighter blocks have improve ratings, at that place are as well fewer of these fighters compared with before blocks:

Due to concurrent evolution and production, which resulted in delivering operational aircraft before the programme has completed development and finalized the aircraft design, the Services must send the current fleet of F-35 aircraft to depot facilities. This is to receive modifications that have been designed since the aircraft were originally manufactured and are at present required for full capability. Some of these modifications are driven by faults in the original design that were not discovered until afterward production had started, such as major structural components that practise not run into the requirements for the intended lifespan, and others are driven by the standing improvement of the design of gainsay capabilities that were known to be defective when the aircraft were start congenital. These modifications are a result of the concurrency of production and development and cause the program to expend resources to send shipping for major re-piece of work, oft multiple times… Since SDD volition continue at to the lowest degree to the middle of 2018, and by then the program volition have delivered well-nigh 200 aircraft to the Services in other than the 3F configuration, the depot modification program and its associated concurrency burden will be with the Services for years to come up.

When the F-35 was laid down, the US Air Force promised that the aircraft would be in service until 2070, with total unit of measurement commitment not expected until 2037. I'd be stunned if the aircraft achieves anything like that level of success — given the cost overruns and scaling problems it seems far more likely that the Air Force volition shift to deploying large numbers of various types of drones long before the government finishes its original procurement of F-35s. Today, it's less a combat shipping and more of a jobs bundle / flying bug report.