F-35 - En hjelm er ikke hva den engang var

Software Is Biggest F-35 Risk, Says Program Executive Officer

AIN DEFENSE PERSPECTIVE » SEPTEMBER 27, 2013

by  BILL CAREY

F-35 software and helmet display issues were discussed by program executive officer Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan at the AFA conference last week. (Photo: U.S. Air Force)

September 27, 2013, 1:25 PM

Software remains the biggest risk of the F-35 program, according to U.S. Air Force Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan, the program executive officer. In a presentation at the Air Force Association (AFA) Air & Space Conference on September 17, Bogdan also discussed progress in fixing the Joint Strike Fighter’s helmet-mounted display systems (HMDS), and program costs.

Lockheed Martin’s scheduled delivery of the full-capability Block 3F software in 2017 “highly depends” on the performance of interim Block 2B and 3I software releases, Bogdan said. Block 2B is the “initial warfighting” software that adds sensor capabilities missing from the current training software releases, plus the AIM-120 AAM, GBU-12 laser-guided bombs, and the GBU-32 Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM). Block 3I is the same software, but hosted on new processors.

The Block 2B software was slated to be delivered for flight-test last month, but has been delayed until April next year, according to testimony to a Congressional committee last June by Michael Gilmore, the Pentagon’s director of operational test and evaluation (DOT&E). It is not slated for release to the fleet until mid-2015. Moreover, Gilmore told the committee, F-35s equipped with Block 2B “would likely need significant support from other fourth-generation and fifth-generation combat systems to counter modern, existing threats, unless air superiority is somehow otherwise assured and the threat is cooperative.”

However, in a mandatory report to Congress last June, the Marine Corps said it will achieve initial operational capability (IOC) with the F-35B equipped with Block 2B by only six months later, in December 2015. In his AFA presentation, Bogdan said he is “confident” that the Marine Corps would achieve its planned IOC date. He earlier toldVanity Fair magazine (which published a long article on the F-35 this month) that there is nothing in U.S. procurement law to prevent the Marines declaring IOC before operational testing is complete.

The U.S. Air Force plans IOC of the F-35A version by December 2016, which is before the Block 3F software is available, Bogdan noted at AFA. Block 3F adds weapons such as the AIM-9X AAM and AGM-154 Joint Standoff Attack Weapon (JSOW), and sensor capabilities such as full radar synthetic aperture radar mapping (SAR), plus expansion of the flight envelope. The Navy plans to declare IOC of the F-35C carrier variant in February 2019.

Meanwhile, the F-35 program is continuing the development of two different helmet-mounted display systems (HMDS) from Vision Systems International (VSI) and BAESystems after encountering problems with the original VSI system. While Lockheed Martin has reported progress in fixing the VSI system, the two systems will compete in a “fly off,” after which the program will choose one HMDS. Bogdan said there is a business calculation in resolving HMDS problems before making a final selection. Bogdan told Vanity Fair, “Lockheed Martin would very much like to influence my decision-making here in favor of the [VSI] helmet. I’m not letting them do that.” He told the magazine that the BAE helmet costs “$100,000 to $150,000 less.” According toVanity Fair, the VSI helmet costs $500,000.

The development of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter is being driven by a renewed effort to keep the acquisition and sustainment costs of the fifth-generation fighter “affordable,” Bogdan said at AFA. The program office has formed a “control unit” to track costs and is pressing F-35 contractors to weed out costs from their production processes. “By 2019 you are going to see an airplane…that would cost somewhat more than a fourth-generation airplane,” Bogdan said. “I have a commitment from Lockheed Martin, Pratt& Whitney, BAE and Northrop Grumman at the CEO level that they’re going to work together to drive down the cost of this airplane to make it comparable with a fourth-generation airplane.”