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.
