The Strategypage is a comprehensive summary of military news and affairs.
 News As History - November 24, 2009




New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Modern Air Power: War Over the Middle East
2.Commander: Napoleon at War
3.Close Combat: Watch am Rhein
4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 
Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use
How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Fighters, Bombers and Recon Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: F-35 won't work well in hot climates?
reefdiver    4/13/2009 10:57:10 AM
from:
link
Not necessarily the best source but does bring up some points. Heat management, particulary in light of increasing electronics requirements, has always been a substantial issue for the F-35.

excepts from the article:
....will not fly properly in hot weather

...early versions of the showpiece F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter are ?very limited? in the heat.

...In America, F-35s are only doing limited flying in hot weather while the makers try to fix the problem.

...(the F-35) jets will have limited range and may even have problems landing with weapons on board. That could mean pilots having to dump any bombs that have not been used.

...The F-35 risks overheating because designers want it to be ?stealthy? ? so it won?t show up on enemy radar. That means it can?t have the usual air scoops and vents to cool its engine, since they would show up as infra-red hotspots.

So pilots need lots of fuel on board to keep the jet cool, restricting mission range.

It is an even bigger headache for the British F-35B jump jet model, which already has less range than other versions because its big fan for hovering takes up a lot of fuel space.

Defence Technology International editor-in-chief Bill Sweetman told us: ?JSF in its current form will be very limited in hot-weather performance and modifications intended to fix the problem won?t start to be tested until 2011 or 2012.

?But by that time the UK will be well down the road to building ships that can only operate JSFs.?

The Ministry of Defence admits sorting the F-35 for hot weather is ?a demanding task? but insists they are on top of the problem and ?it is not a programme risk?.
 
Quote    Reply

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted
Pages: PREV  1 2 3
SpudmanWP       5/13/2009 1:53:43 PM
""The F35 meets ALL heat requirements.""
 
No it doesn 't .

Furthermore , the aircraft has still to be tested in many configurations never tried yet and some more heat problems might come to light and something is telling me that it will happen . Anyway , no engine worldwide runs as hot as the F-35 engine and the aircraft IR signature is enormous since it has no acting cooling whatsoever . I don 't think such IR sig is part of the requirements .

Then , the fuel heat exchange is nowhere to be fixed yet . If the heat exchangers and pumps installed all over the aircraft are failing as it is the case now , a complete redesign is a real possibility .
 
Spudman , are you trying to tell me what a STOVL aircraft is ? Please ...

""Also, the B's primary mission is not Deep Strike but CAS""

False .

Oh well , just try to explain to the UK that they will not be able to to deep stike missions with their Carriers ...

Cheers .

BW, please provide some credible evidence that the F-35 does not meet the minimum thermal management now.
 
-------------------------------
The aircraft is meeting the specification for thermal management, but the Joint Strike Fighter program?s deputy executive officer, Maj. Gen. David Heinz (select), says he is asking contractors to assess the costs of changes to give it a bigger margin over the requirement.  ?We meet that requirement but it is a very tough requirement,? Heinz says, adding that, while he has asked for studies for an improved margin, ?at the moment I don?t need it.?
 
As to the Hot fuel issue from the same article:
The F-35 is designed to transfer heat from its powerful electronics and systems to its fuel, to keep the aircraft cool and make it less detectable by infrared cameras.....

High fuel temperature would not result in critical failure, Burbage says, speaking at the Australian International Airshow here. The limit on the temperature is set by the heat tolerance of the full-authority digital engine control unit submerged in a fuel tank, he says. Overly hot fuel will shorten the unit?s life, but not cause it to suddenly fail.
------------------------

As to fire danger in the fuel tanks, there is a nitrogen generator on board that will keep the fuel tanks from filling with combustible fuel vapors, thereby being safer in a hot environment.

Who says fuel pumps and exchangers are failing???
 
BW, I thought you might pick up on the sarcasim in my F-35B STOVL answer
 
The 3 tons of missing fuel are obviously taken up by the lift fan.  I just could not figure out why you did not know that.
 
The UK had two choices when they designed their new carrier concept.  Either a conventional cat assisted F-35C or a ramp assisted F-35B.  They looked at their requirements and decided that the F-35B was what they wanted to complete the missions they had envisioned.
 
So, in conclusion, the F-35 DOES MEET the minimum thermal requirements as set out in the program today.  Would they like more, sure.  Is it required, NO.
 
Feel free to reference a credible source that says otherwise.
 
SpudmanWP
 
Quote    Reply

Beazz       5/13/2009 2:09:47 PM

Beazz , where did I say that the MN is as powerfull as the USN ??? I never said that as it cannot be .

I said that we are the only two capable of mix carrier operations , so please try to read what I say .

 


""The F35 meets ALL heat requirements.""

 

No it doesn 't . 
 
YES it does!!  Get over it BW. The US and it's partners are about to produce yet another superior plane to the French failure, better know as the Rafale. !! Fitting name for that clunker I'd say. And stop compareing the French Navy to the USN in the carrier field in any form. There is NO comparison. France is not even at the ball park, let alone in the game BW.
 
I have always been what is called on these sites a *fan boy* of my country. Just like you BW. But over the last couple years of reading on these boards I have come to be in even more awe of what our guys are capable of. Unlike you, I have actually read what those on here have to say about the *system level* and like I said, I am now in more in awe of what the US militaRY is capable of doing if called upon. The French and it's Rafale are simply not even in the same league when it comes down to actually haveing to perform and keep up the pace. Your 30 navalized Rafales are nothing more then something to look at and against a compitent enemy would be destroyed in a very short time regardless of how good they are. France simply does not have the ability to fight at the system level that the USN does and thats just life BW. The USN is about to add the second most lethal plane on earth to its arsenal in a few years and become even that much more lethal. France is stuck with an underfunded, underproduced plane that NOBODY but France thinks is any good. You and little piggy can shout everyone on the internet down all ya want about how great your plane is. But the guys writing the checks are NEVER going to buy it because they can get better and cheaper elsewhere. Thats the facts BW. Accept it and move on pal.
 
 
link
 

The aircraft is meeting the specification for thermal management, but the Joint Strike Fighter program?s deputy executive officer, Maj. Gen. David Heinz (select), says he is asking contractors to assess the costs of changes to give it a bigger margin over the requirement.

?We meet that requirement but it is a very tough requirement,? Heinz says, adding that, while he has asked for studies for an improved margin, ?at the moment I don?t need it.?
 
Beazz

Furthermore , the aircraft has still to be tested in many configurations never tried yet and some more heat problems might come to light and something is telling me that it will happen . Anyway , no engine worldwide runs as hot as the F-35 engine and the aircraft IR signature is enormous since it has no acting cooling whatsoever . I don 't think such IR sig is part of the requirements .


Then , the fuel heat exchange is nowhere to be fixed yet . If the heat exchangers and pumps installed all over the aircraft are failing as it is the case now , a complete redesign is a real possibility .


 

Spudman , are you trying to tell me what a STOVL aircraft is ? Please ...

 


""Also, the B's primary mission is not Deep Strike but CAS""

 

False .

Oh well , just try to explain to the UK that they will not be able to to deep stike missions with their Carriers ...


 

Cheers .



 
 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings12       5/13/2009 7:28:13 PM
Beazz and Spudman , you think that I am coming empty handed ?
It seems than you are both wrong and I am more up to date regarding the F-35 heat problems than you are .
For starter , did you read that :
 
h*tp://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3a56e1285b-880c-470c-8a9e-2bf45c93ff1b
 
Do you know what I mean now ? 
Quote :
- "hot enough to discolor paint."
- "Time for the JSF enthusiasts hereabouts to show us an example of a similar, apparently round-edged and hot nozzle on the visible lower surface of any stealth aircraft."
- "In any event, the JSF has a thermal management problem"
- "Thermal management challenges hamper the ability to conduct missions in hot and cold environments."
etc ...

When I said that new heat exchangers and new fuel pumps are a real possibility , I was not talking lightly .
 
Cheers .

 
Quote    Reply

Beazz       5/13/2009 8:08:45 PM

Beazz and Spudman , you think that I am coming empty handed ?

It seems than you are both wrong and I am more up to date regarding the F-35 heat problems than you are .

For starter , did you read that :

 

h*tp://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3a56e1285b-880c-470c-8a9e-2bf45c93ff1b

 

Do you know what I mean now ? 

Quote :


- "hot enough to discolor paint."

- "Time for the JSF enthusiasts hereabouts to show us an example of a similar, apparently round-edged and hot nozzle on the visible lower surface of any stealth aircraft."

- "In any event, the JSF has a thermal management problem"

- "Thermal management challenges hamper the ability to conduct missions in hot and cold environments."

etc ...




When I said that new heat exchangers and new fuel pumps are a real possibility , I was not talking lightly .


 

Cheers .







LOL.. What a chump you are BW. You pull up some non-sense from Bill Sweetman who is a KNOWN anti F35 clown who pulled up a statement from one of his FELLOW reporters that was PURELY HIS OPINION on something he does NOT have access to and you now rate these 3rd party opinions over the top USAF and LM gentlemen in charge of the F35? Yea, that's who I'm gonna believe.. yea right lol Thanks but I'll take what the actual people that are in charge of the program say over some nitwit known F35 haters. Got anything of value to offer? Value would be actual statements from people actually involved with the aircraft. NOT someones OPINION of what they MIGHT think.
 
Do you know what I mean rookie? Ya know BW, I admit I don't know a damn thing about this other then what I read. But your ignorance on it makes even me look like I actually know something about it!! When the best you can come up with to dog a program is some 3rd party statement by an individual that everyone and their brother knows literally hates the program and offer that up as evidence when it is contrary to everything the actual people running the program say shows one of two things. Either you are a complete idiot or you have an agenda. In your case I vote BOTH.
 
Have a nice day rookie.. KNOW wut I mean?? lol
 
Beazz
 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings12       5/13/2009 8:28:52 PM
Beazz , I know who is B. Sweetman and I also know that everything he says should be taken with a grain of salt and be verified first . I know that .
Nevertheless , what he says stand so far (pictures to prove it) and LM has some very real problems in their hands .
 
You bash me for choosing a B. Sweetman argument , but you do not answer the argument itself . How do you want us to have a proper discussion ???
 
Cheers .
 
Quote    Reply

Beazz       5/13/2009 9:05:42 PM

Beazz , I know who is B. Sweetman and I also know that everything he says should be taken with a grain of salt and be verified first . I know that .

Nevertheless , what he says stand so far (pictures to prove it) and LM has some very real problems in their hands .

 

You bash me for choosing a B. Sweetman argument , but you do not answer the argument itself . How do you want us to have a proper discussion ???


 

Cheers .



If you know what Sweetman is, then you should not be useing his conclusions as fact. Those pictures mean absolutley nothing BW. No one knows when or under what conditions those pictures were taken. What has been done to correct the problem, assumeing there was one. And you cannot come to that conclusion just by looking at those pictures. There is NO way for you or me OR Sweetman and his chronys to know WHY those pictures look like they do.
I answered your argument with actual statements from the actual people in charge of the development of the airplane. They say this so called heat problem is NOT a heat problem. Just something they would like to improve on if possible, but NOT necessary!! And knowing the way America builds fighters, I'd bet a big chunk of change if they want a bigger cushion, that is just what they will get.  Now you can chose to take some picture that no one knows the background behind and some trumped analysis of it from a known anti F35 man or statements from the people running the program that completely contradict this man. I choose the people that actually know what is going on with the F35. Simple as that BW.
 
The F35 is/will go forward as planned. It will be the second most dominant aircraft in anyones military inventory, right behind the F22.
 
Beazz
 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings12       5/13/2009 9:16:47 PM
Beazz :
""The F35 is/will go forward as planned. It will be the second most dominant aircraft in anyones military inventory, right behind the F22.""
 
This is not what I believe . I think it will be a dog full of various flees , highly unreliable with an enormous maintenance cost .
And yes , it has heat problems ...
 
Cheers .
 
Quote    Reply

SpudmanWP       5/14/2009 1:02:10 PM

BW Wrote:
This is not what I believe . I think it will be a dog full of various flees , highly unreliable with an enormous maintenance cost .
And yes , it has heat problems ...

 
Oh my gosh? they will melt on the tarmac and fall from the skies??

Oh wait? doing research? oops, you (and Sweetman) are wrong again. Anyone surprised? Not me.

That vent/exhaust port is not the exhaust of the heat exchangers and the paint was not damaged by said heat exchangers.

That port is the exhaust of the APU!! It?s a freaking turbine engine! It is only used while on the tarmac for engine startup and in flight during an emergency.

Here is the APU

link

 

Here is a shot of the BF-1 with the port cover on:

link

 

Another error Sweetman made in the link you provided is:

Sweetman : Hydraulic actuators are inherently cooled by circulation of fluid, but the electro-hydrostatic actuators on the F-35 are not on a fluid circuit.

 

The EHAs on the F-35 are linked in the same Fuel Cooling Circuit as the rest of the systems. The picture in Sweetman?s article clearly shows 3 central connectors (power and control) and two connectors on each side of the arm. These side connectors are located on the hydraulic end, not the motor end and are obviously related to cooling.

 
 
Quote    Reply

Beazz       5/14/2009 2:23:36 PM

Beazz :


""The F35 is/will go forward as planned. It will be the second most dominant aircraft in anyones military inventory, right behind the F22.""

 

This is not what I believe . I think it will be a dog full of various flees , highly unreliable with an enormous maintenance cost .


And yes , it has heat problems ...

 

Cheers .




Whatever BW. Me thinks you are confusing the F35 with that dog better known as the Rafail. I understand that you and your French pals are hoping against all odds the F35 will flop and by default the Rafail will get some sales. But, it's simply not going to happen. Even if it did flop, NO one still wants your plane bw. What part of that are you not understanding? The F35 is not even in production yet and 8-10 nations are already lineing up to buy it and the Rafail is out there in production (well if you call 1/2 plane a month production) and still NO ONE wants it. Do you people in France ever even ask yourslef why that is? Just curious.
Don't you think Frances energy would be better served if instead of trying to find fault in every other nations planes, it actually made it's own plane competitive? This is a free market world we live in. When someone wants something, they go shopping for what they need and get the best bang for the buck to accomplish that. To date, no one on the planet seems to think they get that from the French product. It's just that simple BW. Get over it.
 
The only heat problem the F35 is going to have is it is going to be one sh**hot fighter when it comes into service in just a couple of years. ;-)
 
Cheeers to you,
Beazz
 
Quote    Reply
Pages: PREV  1 2 3



StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2009StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy