WASHINGTON, Jan. 6, 2011 – The Defense Department has found $154 billion in efficiencies over the next five years and will be able to invest $70 billion of that saved money in more deserving accounts, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said today.The secretary announced the savings and reinvesting of the efficiencies during a Pentagon news conference.Gates emphasized that the nation is at war and faces a range of future security threats. “It is important to not repeat the mistakes of the past by making drastic and ill-conceived cuts to the overall defense budget,” he said. “At the same time, it is imperative for this department to eliminate wasteful, excessive and unneeded spending.”Gates said he wants every dollar invested in defense spent in the smartest manner. The efficiencies continue a process to reshape and re-balance the defense budget that has already saved the nation $300 billion, he noted.The secretary announced efficiencies in modernization accounts. He said he agrees with the Navy and Marine Corps recommendation to cancel the expeditionary fighting vehicle program, which already has consumed $3 billion to develop and would require another $12 billion to build.Gates said he also will restructure the F-35 joint strike fighter program. The Air Force and Navy variants of the fighter are on schedule, but the short take-off and landing variant is experiencing significant testing problems.“As a result, I am placing the STOVL variant on the equivalent of a two-year probation,” Gates said. “If we cannot fix this variant during this time frame and get it back on track in terms of performance, cost and schedule, then I believe it should be cancelled.”The secretary said he also wants changes to the military’s TRICARE medical program, noting that fees have not risen since the program was introduced in 1995. He said he will propose modest increases to fees for working-age military retirees.These changes also will be part of the fiscal 2012 budget request. The Army will cancel procurement of the SLAMRAAM surface-to air-missile and the non-line-of-sight launch system.The efficiencies will change the way the department uses information technology, consolidating hundreds of information technology centers to save more than $1 billion a year, Gates said.“At the same time,” he added, “I am not satisfied with the progress we have made in this area since August, and expect to make a follow-on announcement with a specific plan of action by next month.”The efficiencies will cut the number of contractors. “Overall, we will cut the size of the staff support contractor cadre by 10 percent per year for three years and realize nearly $3 billion in total savings,” the secretary said.A third efficiency will trim the size of the defense work force and place more in areas with the most pressing need, he said. This should yield $4 billion in savings, he added.Gates is also said he’s initiating changes in the defense intelligence apparatus, and will eliminate or downgrade general and flag officer positions. He will also eliminate or downgrade 200 senior executive positions.The efficiencies will eliminate the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Network Intelligence and Information, the Business Transformation Agency and the U.S. Joint Forces Command, Gates said, though roughly 50 percent of Joint Forces Command will survive and be assigned to other organizations.In April, Gates instructed the services to find at least $100 billion over five years in overhead savings that they could keep and shift to higher-priority programs. They have done so. In addition, defense agencies have found $54 billion in possible efficiencies.Air Force leaders have proposed efficiencies that will total $34 billion over five years. The Army has proposed $29 billion in savings, and the Navy looks to savings of $35 billion over five years.Of the $100 billion in savings, the services will use about $28 billion to deal with higher-than-expected operating expenses. These costs include health care, pay and housing allowances, sustainment of weapons systems, depot maintenance, base support and flight hours and other training.“Frankly, using the savings in this way was not my original intent or preference,” Gates said, “but we have little choice but to deal with these so-called ‘must-pay’ bills –- and better to confront them honestly now than through raiding investment accounts later.”But this still leaves the services with $70 billion to reinvest in higher priority systems. In the Air Force, this will mean the service can buy more Reaper unmanned aerial vehicles and enable the service to move this capability from the war budget to the base budget. It will also allow the service to increase procurement of the evolved expendable launch vehicle and to modernize radars aboard the F-15 Eagle to keep the fighter jet flying and fighting longer.The Air Force also will be able to invest in development of a long-range, nuclear-capable bomber.The Army will invest in soldiers by improving suicide-prevention and substance-abuse counseling. The service will also modernize its battle fleets of Abrams tanks, Bradley fighting vehicles and Stryker wheeled vehicles. The service also will accelerate fielding of the newest tactical communications network and will invest in more unmanned aerial vehicles and a new unmanned helicopter.The Navy will accelerate procurement of electronic jamming gear and fund refurbishment of Marine Corps equipment. The service is also looking to develop a new generation of sea-borne unmanned strike and surveillance aircraft, and to buy more F-18 Super Hornets. The Navy also will be able to buy more ships, including a destroyer, a littoral combat ship and fleet oilers.Gates stressed the need to make cuts carefully and judiciously.“To maintain the kind of military needed for America’s leadership role requires not only adequate levels of funding, but also fundamentally changing the way our defense establishment spends money and does business,” Gates said. “That is why it is so important to follow through on the program of reform and overhead reduction.“This department simply cannot risk continuing down the same path -– where our investment priorities, bureaucratic habits and lax attitude towards costs are increasingly divorced from the real threats of today, the growing perils of tomorrow and the nation’s grim financial outlook,” he added.
The first production F-35 made its inaugural flight on Friday marking another milestone for the F-35 program.http://www.f-16.net/news_article4301.html
Estudo que tras detalhes sobre os requerimentos e metas de performance do programa F-35. Muita informacao ate entao classificada:CitarAU/ACSC/BOWMAN/AY08AIR COMMAND AND STAFF COLLEGEAIR UNIVERSITYScorecardA Case study of the Joint Strike Fighter ProgrambyGeoffrey P. Bowman, LCDR, USNA Research Report Submitted to the FacultyIn Partial Fulfillment of the Graduation RequirementsAdvisor: Mr. Budd A. JonesMaxwell Air Force Base, AlabamaApril 2008Documento (pdf):https://www.afresearch.org/skins/rims/q ... nginespageouhttp://alturl.com/ajfvf Trecho:[...]Common Performance ParametersThere are several performance based parameters for which the services authored different thresholds and objectives. These differences were typically based on a service's unique mission requirements.Combat radius is a Key Performance Parameter and is unique to each model of the JSF. Each service's threshold and objective combat radius parameters are listed below in Figure 1.13 The Navy's significant difference is based on its unique mission operating procedures that require not only more fuel for longer mission distances, but a larger reserve upon return to the aircraft carrier. The USMC STOVL version's shorter range is based on its expeditionary mindset that assumes the mission will originate organically and therefore closer to the target area.Payload requirements were similar for all three variants but differed in their demand for an internal gun. All variants called for at least four external stations capable of carrying all threshold weapons. A minimum of two stations must be capable of carrying and be plumbed for fuel tanks. The internal payload is where the difference is noted. All three required the ability to carry two AMRAAM air-air-missiles and two air-to-ground weapons in the two-thousand pound class, but there was disagreement on the need for an internal gun. The CTOL variant demanded an internal gun, the STOVL called for a missionized gun, and the CV variant required that space be provided for either an internal or missionized gun.The airspeed requirement also shares some similarities across all three variants. The JSF shares a requirement for its operational limit speed for each variant but differs slightly when it comes to requirements for operational speeds in level flight. The limit speed with internal weapons is 700 knots calibrated air speed (KCAS) or 1.6 MACH, whichever is less, "in order to provide adequate dash capability for a bugout maneuver." The level flight speed requirements for each variant are listed below in Figure 2.16 The configuration for the speeds listed is internal weapons only and makes no concessions for external pylons or weapons. The only notable difference is that the USAF CTOL variant requires the ability to achieve 1.0 MACH at sea level using maximum power.Maneuverability is addressed in both general and specific terms. The requirement for all three variants is to provide a platform that will have a positive exchange ratio during air combat maneuvering (ACM) engagements against "high performance threats that employ helmet mounted cueing and high off-boresight weapons." The JSF must further possess high angle of attack (AOA) capabilities "similar in nature to (or better than) the F-18C." The fuel levels and payloads at which maneuverability is calculated differs for each variant but generally focuses on a post-weapons release payload and fuel state at 50% of the required combat radius. Figure 3 below lists the specific maneuverability requirements and shows the differences among the variants. The most notable differences are related to the USAF requirements for the CTOL JSF. The USAF includes a threshold requirement for a 9.0 G capability at 60% fuel and no air-to groundordnance remaining. In addition to the high-end requirement, the USAF also provides for a more realistic scenario of high altitude, large payload performance. The CTOL must have the capability of performing a 30 degree bank turn while still maintaining a 1000 foot per minute climb at 30,000 feet with a combat loadout of two external fuel tanks, two external JDAM, two internal JDAM, two internal AIM-120 missiles, and a fully loaded gun.Air Force Mission Needs and Specific Performance ParametersThe USAF needs a strike fighter to replace the venerable A-10 attack platform and the aging F-16 multirole fighter. This replacement would be the "second tier" fighter behind the F-22 and perform the CAS role left empty by the A-10. The Air Force intends on buying large numbers and will need the costs kept reasonable. The JSF will be used to "support the USAF core competencies of Air and Space Superiority, Global Attack, Precision Engagement, and Agile Combat Support." It will complement the F-22 and bomber assets within the Command,Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (C4ISR) architecture making interoperability essential to combat effectiveness. Interoperability is seen as crucial because future operations are expected to require seamless information flow from the tactical to strategic (to include the President and Secretary of Defense) levels and back. Fulfilling these expectations under a program whose self-proclaimed cornerstone is "affordability" would be a tall order and require the USAF to pick and choose performance requirements carefully.Navy Mission Needs and Specific Performance ParametersThe Navy needs a fifth generation stealth fighter/attack platform to replace its aging legacy F/A-18 A-C models and to complement the F/A-18 E/F. It is essential that the JSF work seamlessly with organic Carrier Strike Group assets as well as other assets within the joint and combined force structure. The Naval variant must have full interoperability within the C4ISR structure. In addition, CV variant must be capable of operating from both current CVN class carriers as well as future CVX models.The capability to operate from a carrier is not as easy as it sounds. Additional weight comes in the form of stronger landing gear, fuselage center barrel strength, arresting hook structure, and additional electrical power requirements. The Navy has added approach speed as a service specific key performance parameter. The threshold for approach speed is 145 knots with 15 knots of wind over the deck. This must be possible at Required Carrier Landing Weight (RCLW). The RCLW is the sum of the aircraft operating weight, the minimum required bringback, and enough fuel for two instrument approaches and a 100nm BINGO profile to arrive at a divert airfield with 1000 pounds of fuel. The minimum required bringback is two 2000 pound air-to-ground weapons and two AIM-120s. The Navy further requires that the CV JSF be capable of carrier recovery with internal and external stores; the external stations must have 1000 pound capability on the outboard stations and maximum station carriage weight on the inboard.Marine Corps Needs and Specific Performance ParametersThe Marine Corps requires a Short Take-Off and Landing (STOVL) multi-role fighter to replace its aging AV-8B as well as its conventional F/A-18 A-C aircraft. The USMC variant must be able to operate from expeditionary airfields, Amphibious Assault Ships, and current and future Aircraft Carriers. The JSF must be able to meet or exceed legacy aircraft capability while incorporating stealth technology. It must further be fully integrated into the joint C4ISR architecture.The Marine Corps has the added requirement of STOVL performance to address. The USMC has added STOVL performance as a service specific key performance parameter. The requirement is listed as follows:With two 1000# JDAMs and two internal AIM-120s, full expendables, execute a 550 foot (450 UK STOVL) STO from LHA, LHD, and aircraft carriers (sea level, tropical day, 10 kts operational WOD) and with a combat radius of 450 nm (STOVL profile). Also must perform STOVL vertical landing with two 1000# JDAMs and two internal AIM-120s, full expendables, and fuel to fly the STOVL Recovery profile.The Marine Corps has used the more limiting deck launch, rather than a simple expeditionary airfield, to frame its requirement.[...]
AU/ACSC/BOWMAN/AY08AIR COMMAND AND STAFF COLLEGEAIR UNIVERSITYScorecardA Case study of the Joint Strike Fighter ProgrambyGeoffrey P. Bowman, LCDR, USNA Research Report Submitted to the FacultyIn Partial Fulfillment of the Graduation RequirementsAdvisor: Mr. Budd A. JonesMaxwell Air Force Base, AlabamaApril 2008
//www.youtube.com/watch?v=s5fcsjczkLI
Navy test pilot Lt. Christopher Tabert takes to the sky July 27 in an F-35C test aircraft launched by a steam catapult for the first time. CF-3 is the designated carrier suitability testing aircraft, and is in Lakehurst for catapult and jet blast deflector testing. The F-35C is the carrier variant of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, and is distinct from the F-35A and F-35B variants. It has larger wing surfaces and reinforced landing gear for slower catapult launch and landing approach speeds and deck impacts associated with the demanding carrier take-off and landing environment. The F-35C is undergoing test and evaluation at NAS Patuxent River prior to eventual delivery to the fleet.
The F-35 Joint Program Office issued a fleet wide precautionary suspension of ground and flight operations earlier today. This action was taken as a result of an incident involving the F-35 conventional takeoff and landing (CTOL) variant AF-4 at Edwards AFB, Calif.Yesterday, at approximately 8:30 a.m. PDT during a standard ground maintenance engine run, aircraft AF-4′s Integrated Power Package (IPP) experienced a failure. Following standard operating procedures, the engine was immediately shut down and the jet was secured. No injuries to the pilot or ground crew occurred. The F-35′s IPP is a turbo-machine that provides power to start the engine and generates cooling for the aircraft.The government and contractor engineering teams are reviewing the data from the incident to determine the root cause of the failure. Implementing a precautionary suspension of operations is the prudent action to take at this time until the F-35 engineering, technical and system safety teams fully understand the cause of the incident. Once the facts are understood, a determination will be made when to lift the suspension and begin ground and flight operations of the 20 F-35s currently in flying status. These aircraft are part of the System Development and Demonstration (SDD) and Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) fleet.Determinations of root cause and potential mitigating actions have the highest priority of the F-35 Team. Impact to SDD execution and production operations is being assessed. The program has built schedule margin into the test schedule to accommodate these kinds of incidents that occur in a development effort. Periodic updates concerning this situation will be released as warranted.http://www.globalstressengineers.info/?p=1200
General Electric (GE) and partner Rolls Royce have stopped financing their F136 afterburning turbofan designed for the F-35 Lightning II, the two companies announced Dec. 2............
