F-35 is grounded for now
02-23-2013 | 08:58 AM
#1
Thread Starter
Working weekends
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,384
Likes: 0
From: Left Seat
F-35 is grounded for now
...from Fox Business News
Pentagon suspends F-35 flights due to engine blade crack | Fox Business
how much are we paying for each one of these ?
Pentagon suspends F-35 flights due to engine blade crack | Fox Business
The Pentagon on Friday suspended the flights of all 51 F-35 fighter planes after a routine inspection revealed a crack on a turbine blade in the jet engine of an F-35 test aircraft in California.
It was the second grounding of the warplane in two months and marked another setback for the $396 billion F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program, the Pentagon's biggest weapons program. The program has already been restructured three times in recent years and may face further cutbacks if Congress does not avert major budget reductions due to take effect on March 1.
The F-35 program office said it was too early to know if this was a fleet-wide issue, but it was suspending all flights until an investigation was completed. A total of 51 F-35 jets were affected, including 17 that are being used for testing and 34 in use for training in Florida and Arizona.
It said it was working closely with Pratt & Whitney, the United Technologies Corp unit that builds the engine, and Lockheed Martin Corp, the prime contractor for the radar-evading warplane, to ensure the integrity of the engine and return the F-35 fleet to flight as soon as possible.
The Pentagon's F-35 program office began notifying the chiefs of the U.S. Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps late on Thursday about the engine issue and decision to ground the planes, said Kyra Hawn, a spokeswoman for the program office.
She said that a routine inspection at Edwards Air Force Base in California on February 19 revealed a crack on a low pressure turbine blade that is part of the F-35's F135 engine. The blade was on an F-35 A-model, or Air Force variant, which takes off and lands from conventional runways.
Pratt spokesman Matthew said the inspection showed "an indication of a crack" on the third stage low pressure turbine airfoil. He said the company was working closely with the Pentagon, Lockheed and the military services to get the planes flying again.
Engineering teams are removing the turbine blade from the plane and plan to ship it to Pratt's engine facility in Middletown, Connecticut, for more thorough evaluation and root cause analysis, according to the Pentagon and Pratt.
Hawn said an initial analysis was expected next week.
The grounding comes on the heels of a nearly month-long grounding of the Marine Corps variant of the new warplane after a manufacturing defect caused a fuel line to detach just before a training flight in Florida.
The Marine Corps variant of the F-35, which takes off from shorter runways and lands like a helicopter, was grounded for nearly a month after a fuel line detached just before a training flight at Eglin Air Force Base in January.
That issue was later found to be caused by a manufacturing defect. The Pentagon and the U.S. Navy lifted flight restrictions on the B-model of the plane on February 13.
Read more: Pentagon suspends F-35 flights due to engine blade crack | Fox Business
It was the second grounding of the warplane in two months and marked another setback for the $396 billion F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program, the Pentagon's biggest weapons program. The program has already been restructured three times in recent years and may face further cutbacks if Congress does not avert major budget reductions due to take effect on March 1.
The F-35 program office said it was too early to know if this was a fleet-wide issue, but it was suspending all flights until an investigation was completed. A total of 51 F-35 jets were affected, including 17 that are being used for testing and 34 in use for training in Florida and Arizona.
It said it was working closely with Pratt & Whitney, the United Technologies Corp unit that builds the engine, and Lockheed Martin Corp, the prime contractor for the radar-evading warplane, to ensure the integrity of the engine and return the F-35 fleet to flight as soon as possible.
The Pentagon's F-35 program office began notifying the chiefs of the U.S. Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps late on Thursday about the engine issue and decision to ground the planes, said Kyra Hawn, a spokeswoman for the program office.
She said that a routine inspection at Edwards Air Force Base in California on February 19 revealed a crack on a low pressure turbine blade that is part of the F-35's F135 engine. The blade was on an F-35 A-model, or Air Force variant, which takes off and lands from conventional runways.
Pratt spokesman Matthew said the inspection showed "an indication of a crack" on the third stage low pressure turbine airfoil. He said the company was working closely with the Pentagon, Lockheed and the military services to get the planes flying again.
Engineering teams are removing the turbine blade from the plane and plan to ship it to Pratt's engine facility in Middletown, Connecticut, for more thorough evaluation and root cause analysis, according to the Pentagon and Pratt.
Hawn said an initial analysis was expected next week.
The grounding comes on the heels of a nearly month-long grounding of the Marine Corps variant of the new warplane after a manufacturing defect caused a fuel line to detach just before a training flight in Florida.
The Marine Corps variant of the F-35, which takes off from shorter runways and lands like a helicopter, was grounded for nearly a month after a fuel line detached just before a training flight at Eglin Air Force Base in January.
That issue was later found to be caused by a manufacturing defect. The Pentagon and the U.S. Navy lifted flight restrictions on the B-model of the plane on February 13.
Read more: Pentagon suspends F-35 flights due to engine blade crack | Fox Business
02-23-2013 | 11:03 AM
#2
Moderator
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,433
Likes: 435
I am by no means a huge fan of the 35, but this really isn't all that unexpected. It could be as simple as a "one of" defect in that blade. But they will still ground them until they inspect them all. Of course it could be something much bigger, which would suck.
There's some truth in the old saying, "never fly the A model of anything."
There's some truth in the old saying, "never fly the A model of anything."
02-23-2013 | 12:15 PM
#3
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 13,843
Likes: 1
From: FAA 'Flight Check'
I am by no means a huge fan of the 35, but this really isn't all that unexpected. It could be as simple as a "one of" defect in that blade. But they will still ground them until they inspect them all. Of course it could be something much bigger, which would suck.
There's some truth in the old saying, "never fly the A model of anything."
There's some truth in the old saying, "never fly the A model of anything."
02-23-2013 | 06:44 PM
#4
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
From: A-10
...from Fox Business News
Pentagon suspends F-35 flights due to engine blade crack | Fox Business
how much are we paying for each one of these ?
Pentagon suspends F-35 flights due to engine blade crack | Fox Business
how much are we paying for each one of these ?
Currently.........$180 million/jet.
03-02-2013 | 04:33 PM
#5
Retired
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,527
Likes: 0
From: whale wrangler
Speaking of the F-35 it looks like someone was a little vocal .
U.S. general's Australian outburst could undermine F-35 program | Reuters
And you just have to love these guys -
"His word choice was ironic, since that's what the companies think he's doing to them," said one executive familiar with the contract talks, who was not authorized to speak publicly.
^^^^^^^^^^^^
But did so anyway .
U.S. general's Australian outburst could undermine F-35 program | Reuters
And you just have to love these guys -
"His word choice was ironic, since that's what the companies think he's doing to them," said one executive familiar with the contract talks, who was not authorized to speak publicly.
^^^^^^^^^^^^
But did so anyway .
03-02-2013 | 08:40 PM
#8
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,149
Likes: 46
From: Volleyball Player
So it wouldn't be a big deal to replace a multi-million dollar motor with another multi-million dollar motor? I think that'd still be a pretty big deal and ground the planes, and I doubt they'd just put the other motors in there rather than figure out the problem and what would be most cost effective.
03-03-2013 | 06:58 AM
#9
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 5,510
Likes: 110
So it wouldn't be a big deal to replace a multi-million dollar motor with another multi-million dollar motor? I think that'd still be a pretty big deal and ground the planes, and I doubt they'd just put the other motors in there rather than figure out the problem and what would be most cost effective.
And the C doesn't even have a gun.
03-03-2013 | 08:07 AM
#10
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 44,905
Likes: 691
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
So it wouldn't be a big deal to replace a multi-million dollar motor with another multi-million dollar motor? I think that'd still be a pretty big deal and ground the planes, and I doubt they'd just put the other motors in there rather than figure out the problem and what would be most cost effective.
The alternate motor would have been theoretically useful in the unlikely event that a serious design flaw rendered the prime engine non-flyable without extensive re-design and re-manufacturing. But the cost of that insurance policy was many billions. I'm willing to do without. The backup should have been killed about ten years before it was (DoD tried hard).
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Bri85
Hangar Talk
11
04-12-2008 08:41 AM
