Note: This is a guest post by Don Bacon. I don't do this often and I link to bloggers that I would ordinarily have write such posts. People like ComNav, American Mercenary, Think Defense, Gabrielle and other. This is an unusual situation though and needed to catch the eyeballs of all concerned. Grab yourself a cup of coffee and enjoy the read....
By Don BaconI have been counseled to wait and see when it comes to the cause of the fire.
News report, USNI, Jun 24:
Some Eglin F-35A Operations Suspended Following Plane Fire
Lockheed Martin F-35A Joint Strike Fighters at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida, have temporarily suspended operations after a fire severely damaged an aircraft on take-off yesterday. [The planes suspended their own operations! Imagine that.]
“Flights for the F-35A CTOL [conventional takeoff and landing] aircraft are temporarily suspended today,” said 1st Lt. Hope Cronin, a public relations officer for the 33rd Fighter Wing. “The F-35Bs and F-35Cs are on a weather pause at this time as Florida weather is rather disagreeable at the moment.”
The rest of the F-35A fleet is flying however according to Joint Program Office spokesman Joe DellaVedova. “Experts are working root cause,” he said.
The fact that the F-35A fleet is still flying suggests that a design flaw is not suspected as a cause of the fire. (end report excerpt)
How interesting. A recent oil leak grounded the entire fleet over the weekend, but a major fire hasn't resulted in a grounding. And -- "The fact that the F-35A fleet is still flying suggests that a design flaw is not suspected as a cause of the fire." (Editors note: I wonder...I would not put it past the program at this critical stage to take "operational risks" to get it across the finish line)
Let's understand one thing to start off with, and then I'll get into the details (which involve the Queen):
They don't know what caused the plane to catch fire and they won't know until their root cause investigation is complete the end of the week at the earliest. So any suggestion as to cause is strictly journalistic license.
Okay, so why the strange behavior?
It's because the Pentagon doesn't want to disrupt the plans for three F-35Bs which are scheduled to fly to England and participate in the naming ceremony, with the United Kingdom Queen doing the honors, for a new British warship. That's a good reason, isn't it? Well, no, but that's the way it is.
The HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales carriers, 70,600 tons displacement, will be the centerpieces of Britain’s naval capability. The HMS Queen Elizabeth will be officially named by the Queen herself in a ceremony at Rosyth in Fife, Scotland, where it is currently being fitted out, on Friday July 4. One (or more) F-35 is scheduled to fly at the naming ceremony (the Brits don't call it a christening).
The Brits want the F-35B as part of the ship's complement. The United Kingdom is the only "tier one" partner on the F-35 development program, which means it's kicked in some serious money for the F-35 development which started in 2001. They've also gained about fifteen percent of the manufacturing pie, with BAE Systems having completed the manufacture of 150 F-35 rear fuselages and tail sets already.
It's been a rocky road for the UK Defence Minister Philip Hammond. First he declared that the UK wanted the STOVL to replace the Harrier, then he switched to the CV variant, then when he found out it would cost $1.24 billion to install cats and traps on their new carrier he switched back to the STOVL variant, F-35B. These changes carried a cost, which lead to the headline "Coalition U-turn on carrier jets 'wasted £258m': Labour blasts 'chaotic' decision to buy jump jets after all."
Originally the UK wanted 138 planes, but that has been decreased to 48 probably for cost reasons as with others. The UK owns (sort of) three F-35B now, and has been planning to order 14 more since at least last October. Reuters faithfully reported all the announcements: Oct 23, 2013, Britain may announce an order for 14 Lockheed Martin-built F-35 super-stealth jets as early as next week. Jan 23, 2014 -- Britain may order 14 F-35 jets as early as next week-sources. Feb 1, 2014 -- UK says close to placing order for F-35 jets. Feb 19, 2014 -- Lockheed to Sell 14 F-35 to U.K. in $5B Deal. Yadda yadda. "Super-stealth." (I guess "super-duper" had been taken.)
Now we hear that this fateful announcement for the UK to "order" fourteen more (they have three) faulty F-35B prototypes will be made at the HMS QE naming ceremony where F-35B will be part of the ceremony! Ta-da. Finally?
How did this idea originate? Colin Clark at Breaking Defense credits General Amos. "The push to give the F-35B such a high profile in Britain — and thus around the world — originated with Gen. James Amos, the Marine Commandant and a pilot. Being a canny fellow, Amos recognized how a fly-by at the new carrier’s christening could boost the plane’s fortunes and he pushed hard for it."
Amos may have had input, and he may be a canny fellow (who knew), but since DM Hammond has more to gain I mostly credit him with the zany idea to fly prototype F-35B airplanes across the Atlantic for a ceremony which would quiet Hammond's critics, get the US on his side (SecState Kerry, definitely not a canny fellow, slighted the UK a year ago) and would also provide a distraction from the money Hammond's indecision has cost the kingdom. Scheduling the ceremony for US Independence (from Britain) Day adds a little spice. It's the unique British sense of humor at work.
But it's not funny. No matter Who originated the idea for this cheap political stunt, it has no doubt affected the decision not to ground the F-35 fleet after the fire at Eglin, even as they seek the root cause. This puts other pilots at risk.
This non-grounding decision has especially added to the danger the F-35B pilots will face crossing the Atlantic Ocean back-and-forth. It was a stupid idea to fly faulty F-35B untested prototypes across the vast Atlantic ocean in the first place, and now it's worse, with pilots at significant risk.
After this fire, so soon after the grounding of the fleet, the question becomes clear. Why is the Pentagon ignoring common safety measures all for a publicity stunt in Europe?
Is the program on such shaky ground in the UK that a cancellation of the performance would kill the UK buy? Is the defense ministry so desperate that they would endanger their pilots for an air show?
The answer appears to be yes. Tech is now more important than the lives of our pilots.
Sidenote: Supporters of the program are encouraged to weigh in. No personal attacks, no flaming, no juvenile behavior. You play by those rules and the debate can rage.
You know they are at the point in the program where they better damn well make "positive progress" come hell or high water... The people controlling the pursestrings are losing their patience and demanding faster progress at a lower cost. As any engineer will tell you: "You can have it done fast, good and cheap... Pick any two."
ReplyDeleteA three day grounding followed by a fire so shortly after being lifted is just too much of a coincidence. Either the oil valve issue was prematurely hand waved away when it shouldn't have been, or shortcuts were taken in order to get the fleet back up in the air ASAP.
Any evidence of malfeasance could be the straw that broke this camel's back.
I'm sure skipping the Farnborough Air Show was simply not an option. Not only Britain, but all of Europe is having some deep second thoughts about the F-35. This little PR stunt is likely there to boost confidence in an aircraft that has seem billions of their taxes, yet after 7 years and over 100 produced, not a single one has made it to their shores.
I'd already gone on long enough so I didn't mention the air shows, which follow the ship naming, and will apparently have F-35 presence.
DeleteThe Royal International Air Tattoo is open to the public from 11-13 July and Farnborough International Air Show is open to trade visitors from 14-18 July and open to the public 19-20 July.
"not a single one has made it to their shores"
DeleteWe are not given a lot of details on the F-35 "stealth" program, so we must guess. I'm guessing that the three B's which attempt the crossing are not the UK three at Eglin.
There will be a Royal Navy presence.
news report:
A Royal Navy instructor pilot working on the F-35B Lightning II jets which will fly off the new aircraft carriers will be among the guests at the naming ceremony of HMS Queen Elizabeth at Rosyth.
Lt Cdr Ian ‘Tidders’ Tidball is one of three UK pilots who have flown the F-35B in the USA and will be passing on his experience to a future generation of Navy pilots. “The Lightning is a really great airplane to fly. I’ve flown both the Sea Harrier and the F18 Super Hornet and without a doubt this is the most enjoyable aircraft I’ve flown in my career,” he said. (end report)
Thank you, ‘Tidders’ Tidball, for lightening us up on the Lightning II.
Couple of points Don
ReplyDelete1.
The previous government indicated that the F35B would be the preferred option to meet the Joint Combat Aircraft (JCA) requirement.
2.
A new coalition government then came into power with Liam Fox as Secretary of State for defence. It was him that announced the switch the F35C, much to the surprise of many on the project apparently who had carried study after study, each one confirming the F35B as the most cost effective means of meeting the JCA requirement for BOTH the RAF and Fleet Air Arm of the Royal Navy
3.
Liam Fox then resigned, under a cloud
4.
Phil Hammond then became the defence secretary and would go on to announce the reversion back to the B variant. He got enormous credibility for this, going in front of the House of Commons and taking the very tough decision. So, Phil Hammond is definitely in pursuit of credibility, he has it in spades.
5.
The cost of the original switch is widely reported to be 'carrier conversion' but the costs were much wider than that, looking across what the UK calls 'Defence Lines of Development', basically, all sorts of areas like logistics, training and other through life costs
6.
For the aircraft to fly in UK airspace would need all manner of approvals and I cannot imagine these take 5 minutes or simply rubber stamped. Air worthiness and air safety is a very serious business in the crowded UK. There is now a very serious military flight safety culture in the UK and the Crown does not have legal immunity
So I don't doubt for one second the thrust of the deployment is a bit of positive PR spin for a programme obviously somewhat in short supply of good headlines but I find the notion that Phil Hammond pushed for it in order to rescue his credibility (which does not need rescuing) and is willing to put military and civilian personnel at risk, completely nonsensical.
Phil Hammond has more credibility than any recent Defence Secretary and the safety, risk and legal environment just don't support the notion
Thanks for the opinion on Hammond, but I disagree.
DeleteBesides the circumstantial evidence on this extraordinary political stunt there is evidence I included, there is in the UK (as elsewhere) a deep disagreement on the merits of the F-35 as a "strike fighter," and particularly the F-35B, which Hammond has highly touted. The B is primarily being pushed as a jobs program in the UK, not on any merits it might have as a "strike fighter." This is an indication of a desperate DM, and Brits knowing something of naval matters don't miss it.
For devastating critiques of how the B won't work for the UK on its carriers go here, here and here.
Yes, the lack of air-worthiness certification is another consideration I didn't have space for it so thanks for mentioning it. I believe there is even a Brussels-based move on to stiffen air rules in Europe generally. The F-35 won't be considered for an air-worthiness certificate until after the end of development testing, which is two years off at least. Flight envelopes are tightly restricted in the U.S. and yet here will go three prototype aircraft off into the wild blue yonder of England and Scotland.
With non-milestone-C development aircraft (currently the whole fleet), I would have opted for taking a USN/USMC flatop across the ocean and have the airshow F-35Bs take-off from the ship there. Still good PR and less risk.
ReplyDeleteupdate from Colin Clark, Breaking Defense:
ReplyDeleteThe SIB should convene “within days” and is expected to produce an assessment within 30 days.The AIB, said a program official, will begin “its investigation as soon as it can do so without interfering in the SIB investigation.” It should be done in 60 to 90 days. Unless there are classified or personnel issues most of the reports should be released. “Initial indications from the field suggest that this is an isolated incident,” the program official said.(end)
Wouldn't you love to know what those "initial indications" are, and then why do they need 30-90 days.
Reuters
ReplyDeleteWASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Air Force said it will resume flights of Lockheed Martin Corp's F-35 A-model fighter jets at a Florida air base on Wednesday, two days after one of the jets caught fire while preparing for takeoff. . .Joe DellaVedova, a spokesman for the Pentagon's F-35 program office, said the fire appeared to be a "one-off" incident. He said there were no plans now to suspend flights for the rest of the fleet.
And on an Unrelated Topic,
ReplyDeleteThe Indian Army has kicked off its Carbine Replacement Program. The top 3 contenders are-
1.) Berreta ARX-160
2.) Colt M4
3.) IWI Galil ACE Carbine Version
I was surprised to find the Tavor missing from the list. Apparently they want designs that can handle multi-calibers. The calibers in question- 5.56x45 and 7.62x39. I did not know that Colt ran conversion kits for 7.62x39.
Oops, the multi calibre ability is for the up coming rifle replacement competition. Not for the carbine.
DeleteThese are very good contenders. I'd pick the Galil ACE personally.
Deletefrom Colin Clark:
ReplyDeleteThe 33rd Fighter Wing, responsible for F-35 training at Eglin Air Force Base, said Wednesday morning that its “commander has decided to continue the temporarily (sic) suspension of F-35A flights at Eglin in the interest of safety as we continue to investigate the cause of the mishap.” First Lt. Hope Cronin said in an email to reporters that “We have no further information regarding the nature or extent of the damage” yet. (end)
The Navy & Marines sail on, after a one-day "operational pause."
today, Jun 25
Delete"We found additional evidence and information in the initial safety investigation to decide to continue with the suspension of [F-35A (?)] flights,” said Air Force Lt. Hope Cronin
It's a "stand-down" not a grounding.
ReplyDeleteAmy Butler, AvWeek
F-35B Stand-down Not Yet Affecting Air Show Timeline
All U.S. Marine Corps F-35B operations remain dormant since a fire broke out in an F-35A preparing for takeoff this week, but this is not expected – at least for now – to affect the timing of the aircraft’s debut in the U.K. next month.
"We will resume flying once we know more about the cause of the F-35A fire that occurred at Eglin AFB [Florida] earlier this week," says Capt. Rich Ulsh, a service spokesman. Plans to transit four F-35Bs over the Atlantic Ocean for their international debut at the Royal International Air Tattoo and Farnborough International Air Show next month have not been changed, he said. The first flight window for the single-engine, stealthy F-35s to cross is June 29. The four F-35Bs are expected to depart from NAS Patuxent River, Maryland, and fly directly with the help of two KC-10s to RAF Fairford, England.
[no mention of carrier naming] ceremony July 4]
What could be affected are internal timelines for the four aircraft to meet at Patuxent River in advance of the departure.
The Air Force has also issued a "stand-down" on flight operations for its F-35As at Eglin that are used for training, as well as Dutch A models at Eglin, says 1st Lt. Hope Cronin, spokeswoman for the 33rd Fighter Wing, which operates them. The fire incident occurred early June 23 as an F-35A pilot was preparing for takeoff. The pilot egressed safely and the fire was extinguished with foam.
Navy officials did not say whether they have fully stood down operations; they are still assessing the situation.
you're causing my eyes to glaze over.
Deletei'm a layman. whether a stand down or a grounding the results are the same.
the planes ain't flying.
These planes can't fly without pilots.
DeleteMore info here: http://breakingdefense.com/2014/06/marines-air-force-f-35-flights-stalled-fire-pause-lengthens/
ReplyDeleteInfo on plans for F35B flights to UK:
ReplyDeletehttp://aviationweek.com/farnborough-2014/priming-jsfs-transatlantic-trip