Thanks William for the link!
via Bloomberg.
This article points in the opposite direction.
via Bloomberg.
Delivery of engines was halted in May after an in-house inspection and testing process “raised questions about the origin” of the titanium, spokesman Matthew Bates said in an e-mailed statement. The company replaced all the suspect engine parts in its inventory for failing to meet specifications, but determined that the metal in 147 F-35 engines already delivered didn’t pose a flight-safety risk, he said.WOW! Really? Seriously? It gets better, this is another passage from the same article (read it all)...
The Pentagon’s F-35 program office said in a statement that Pratt & Whitney’s “persistent problems stem from the supply chain” because 80 percent of the engine is produced by many different subcontractors.I've had major issues with the way that the F-35 program is setup. Too many contractors in too many countries! How they expect to make a profit with a business model like the one the program office is using is beyond me, yet supporters continue to talk about how the cost curve is coming down.
This article points in the opposite direction.
I got scared when I read this.
ReplyDelete"The titanium is also used on some parts of commercial engines made by Pratt & Whitney Canada."
Engine!? really!?
ReplyDeleteThis is the heart of every jet, most planes are build around an good, reliable engine. And now to the long list of fails they ad problems with engine. So this burn out of engine in one F-35 was probably consequences of information Sol' show here. Now this is not the problem with single machine... whole series is doom. Great... how many nails this flying coffin can take more before it crack?!
So... weak titanium and a recent problem which is suspected to be an engine-flaw. Sounds omniously related.
ReplyDeleteProgram is designed to be as cancelation proof as posible ,as every legislator has come local contactor working on it the same goes for potential partners countries. But you can imagine that is no way to make thing affordable or in good quality. But who cares lets just cancel other projects to keep this cash cow running.
ReplyDeleteIt would not be without precedent for a supplier or sub-contractor to take the fall for an error made by the primary contractor or customer. Especially for a highly political project such as this. Don't take this story at face value.
ReplyDelete