FLUG REVUE February 1999: JSF program progresses

BOEING AND LOCKHEED MARTIN BATTLE FOR JOINT SRIKE FIGHTER ORDERS

By Karl Schwarz

Boeing X-32 If Michael H. Heinz, Deputy JSF Manager, wants to check on the progress of work on the X-32 concept demonstrator aircraft, he only has to walk down a few offices. Digital cameras supply a view to the assembly hall via an Internet link between Seattle (Washington) and Palmdale (California). If required he can zoom onto the smallest screw, and possible queries can be settled instantly. This saves time and travel costs for engineers, - and in Palmdale only 15 staff are needed at the moment.

Using the company's internal network is a relatively simple aid in a development program, which both competitors like to call virtual. Linda Poole, Program Manager for Virtual Program Development at Lockheed Martin's Tactical Aircraft Systems in Fort Worth (Texas) demonstrates what is meant by "virtual": Computer animated men load 450kg bombs onto the X-35, which is standing on the swaying deck of an aircraft carrier. Unfortunately they keep bumping their helmets on the bomb bay doors, a problem which has been solved now.

However, not only do powerful computers simulate every imaginable characteristic of the fighter jet, the production sites also exist virtually. The computer can answer the question of how well and how fast a robot arm can paint the insides of the air intakes.

These answers can be decisive, because costs play a very important role in the Joint Strike Fighter Program. Unambiguous guidelines state that a JSF for the US Air Force must not cost more than $28 million. The STOVL model, (Short Take Off and Vertical Landing), for the US Marine Corps and the Royal Navy must cost no more than $35 million and the aircraft carrier version for the US Navy no more than $38 million.

At the same time the Joint Strike Fighter is supposed to fulfil its tasks better than the models that it replaces. Among the basic requirements are therefore:

Stealth characteristics, which enable the aircraft to penetrate heavily defended hostile areas without the support of support aircraft. For this reason weapons are carried internally
high precision munitions, supported by good radar and infra red sensors
excellent communications systems to ensure an exchange of information with other forces in the battle area
low maintenance requirements and a high degree of reliability, to enable the aircraft to fly more missions during crisis
a range which guarantees that 90 per cent of all targets in the hostile area can be reached - even from an aircraft carrier, which is positioned a long way off the coast.
The demands of the military with regards to speed and agility are quite modest. They have to correspond with the current level and must ensure that the aircraft can counter surface-air and air-air threats. Managing to fulfil all these wishes is like squaring a circle. Opinions have been voiced that remind us it has to date not been possible to design a fighter that will fulfil the demands of four Forces. Experts in favour of this new aircraft point out that today there is a far better chance to optimise the design of such an aircraft. They admit however, that a cost effective aircraft family will only become reality if demands are at least partially brought into line with each other.

To achieve this is currently the thankless task of the JSF Program Bureau under the leadership of Leslie F. Kenne (USAF). It is here that Joint Interim Requirements Documents (JIRD) are being worked on. A constant dialogue with future users and industry is maintained. For instance, the involved parties haggle over the installation of a canon. The US Air Force would like to have one, while the Navy and Marine Corps would be happy with a container. The question whether the bomb bay should take 450 kg or 900 kg weapons has also not been solved yet. There are also questions regarding range.

All these factors have an effect on the design of the aircraft. Studies, which were carried out by Boeing and Dassault, show that about 40 per cent of the fuselage can be identical in all three versions, (deployment over land, STOVL, deployment as carrier). 20 per cent of parts can be used in two aircraft without any alterations, a further 20 per cent would be so-called "cousin parts", (e.g. ribs with the same shape but different thickness), and the rest would have to be constructed individually for each model.

The final solution will depend on the Joint Requirement Document, which will be available in a provisional version in 1999 and will be finalised in 2000.

Boeing and Lockheed Martin intend to have their trial aircraft airborne in the Spring of 2000. Currently two of each are being assembled only a few kilometres apart at Palmdale Airport. Both planes will undertake their maiden flights to the Edwards Air Force Base situated close by.

Next on the agenda are tests with an aircraft in the USAF Configuration. It will be modified at a later stage and be tested for aircraft carrier suitability. The second planes will each be fitted with swivel jets and other systems required for short take off and vertical landing. This part of the test program will present the biggest challenge.

At the same time as they are building and testing their trial aircraft, Boeing and Lockheed Martin, together with their suppliers, are also working on new technologies which could be beneficial in the series production of their JSF's. All suggestions will be incorporated in these aircraft, from which a winner will be picked by the middle of 2001.

It won't be an easy decision for the Pentagon, because the dominant position in the fighter business for the next 20 to 40 years is at stake here. This is why one probably does not really want to dependent on just one supplier.

For the winner the future will be heavenly: The Forces that have been involved so far have a need for almost 3,000 JSF's alone. There will be additional export opportunities into countries like Holland, Denmark, Norway Italy, Turkey, Singapore or Australia.

From page 44 of FLUG REVUE 2/99

Home | Update | LATEST ISSUE | Gallery | FR Profile | Datafiles | FR 2/99
Copyright 1998/99 by Motor-Presse Stuttgart. All rights reserved.
Last updated January 12, 1999
FLUG REVUE, Ubierstr. 83, 53173 Bonn, Germany