The RCAF's Next Generation Fighter (CF-188 Replacement)

[armrdsoul77]

Right to repair: Why the US military can’t fix much of its own equipment


"The F-35 is one example of the ripple effects of these policies. Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps maintainers said the lack of technical data prevents them from making routine repairs to many F-35 components, according to a 2023 Government Accountability Office report.

Maintainers “had grown frustrated at not being able to make simple repairs to aircraft components that they have historically made on other fighter aircraft fleets,” the watchdog wrote. “F-35 maintainers at one location told us that they have access to so little technical information on the aircraft that they do not fully understand the aircraft or how to troubleshoot common problems. As a result, the maintainers frequently rely on contractor personnel for assistance in maintenance tasks they would be otherwise qualified to complete.”

 

[lenaitch]

Right to repair: Why the US military can’t fix much of its own equipment


"The F-35 is one example of the ripple effects of these policies. Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps maintainers said the lack of technical data prevents them from making routine repairs to many F-35 components, according to a 2023 Government Accountability Office report.

Maintainers “had grown frustrated at not being able to make simple repairs to aircraft components that they have historically made on other fighter aircraft fleets,” the watchdog wrote. “F-35 maintainers at one location told us that they have access to so little technical information on the aircraft that they do not fully understand the aircraft or how to troubleshoot common problems. As a result, the maintainers frequently rely on contractor personnel for assistance in maintenance tasks they would be otherwise qualified to complete.”

Sounds like a win-win for LM. Taking a page from the John Deere ag playbook.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Sounds like a win-win for LM. Taking a page from the John Deere ag playbook.

Except at some point the US government is big enough to force the issue, unlike a bunch of farmers.

 

[Retired AF Guy]

Right to repair: Why the US military can’t fix much of its own equipment


"The F-35 is one example of the ripple effects of these policies. Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps maintainers said the lack of technical data prevents them from making routine repairs to many F-35 components, according to a 2023 Government Accountability Office report.

Maintainers “had grown frustrated at not being able to make simple repairs to aircraft components that they have historically made on other fighter aircraft fleets,” the watchdog wrote. “F-35 maintainers at one location told us that they have access to so little technical information on the aircraft that they do not fully understand the aircraft or how to troubleshoot common problems. As a result, the maintainers frequently rely on contractor personnel for assistance in maintenance tasks they would be otherwise qualified to complete.”

So how does that apply to F-35s in foreign service? Does that RCAF maintainers would be able to make simple repairs on our F-35s and require LockMart contractors to do the work?

 

[KevinB]

Possible. But unlikely.







The HAPS are not heard or seen, nor are they armed.

The article you put out suggests they would be armed - which is what I drew the issue with them on.
Yes a long loiter Ultra High Altitude system is great - however if you see the optical packages on the NRO satellites (they had better than Hubble stuff years before Hubble - and had a spare array lying outdoors in their boneyard when NASA needed a Hubble fix) they are not going to fit on one of those airframe -- while they can get some data, they aren't pulling up the UHD imagery a NRO satellite can.

They have the same visibility as actual satellites.
The difference is they are cheaper and can be more easily reassigned.

As I addressed above, if you look at the size of some of NRO's "Spy Satellites", the optical sensors are significantly beyond the payload of those aircraft - and you don't get the same sort of return -- same with the U-2A we still fly -- it does some work -- but generally one needs to task a KH-11 for detailed imagery.

They can supply data for civilian users just as easily as military users and make themselves useful to the locals so that they are seen as a utility.

And that is going to the absurd.
Every argument at the pub resolved with a nuclear wasteland.

You are right I am not arguing for sole platforms and replacement.
I am arguing that in a multi-layered system, over time you will have the opportunity to stress different layers, task them differently and bring in new capabilities that will adjust the balance.

And I think that the last 33 years, and in particular the last 5 or so, has given ample reasons to reassess the balance.

The F-22 is still the worlds premium AS fighter -- it was well before the F-35

I agree. But. Even in the absence of air superiority the Russians and Ukrainians maintain abilities to bombard each other to the point that their economies are disrupted and their ground forces are stale-mated.

In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king.
Having AS and being able to deep strike and deny launch areas to the enemy is what those high end fighters offer.

And absent any kind of air defences Iran is still spouting off rounds that discomfit their neighbours and allow them to tell the story that they are not defeated. I've seen that movie before.

View attachment 99471

Having said that, Israel had to put up with a bombardment from Hamas, Hezbollah, and recently Houthis, that originated from parking lots that were, in Toronto terms, launched against Scarborough targets from Mississauga. And they have beenn putting up with it for 40 years and have had to divert a ton of effort, lives and shekels into countering the problem. They had F35s. Their enemies didn't.

Yes, and those F-35's gave Israel the ability to to strike all over the area without significant concerns.
The F-35 be itself isn't a shield.

The F35 is not a patrol craft. It is a recce craft. In my view it spends most of its life on the ground but when any of the high flying surveillance assets determine a suspicious situation then the F35 can be launched into the potentially hostile environment to assess the situation. And maybe deal with it with onboard munitions or call up support and act as local controller.

It is both -- a patrol system and a strike system.

As I said, it is a reaction capability. A recce capability.

When I said they would be loitering in the area I did mean that they could loiter in the air. But freedom of the skies does not demand literally maintaining a 24/7 CAP with F35s.

The loitering can be done by 10 HAPS for the price of one F35 and at a considerably reduced operating cost. And that would be just one of many surveillance layers just as the F35 would be just one of many strike layers and one of many recce layers.

Again I think you are missing the Forest for the trees

 

[KevinB]

So how does that apply to F-35s in foreign service? Does that RCAF maintainers would be able to make simple repairs on our F-35s and require LockMart contractors to do the work?

The only claim I’ve heard discussed is generally aircraft ‘skin’ repairs. The F-117, F-22, B-2 and soon to be B-21 skin are/were not worked on by the USAF personnel.

I guess the question is are the countries going to send tech’s to learn how to do that. Or be like the USAF and contract it out to the OEM (and then bitch about it).

 

[Kirkhill]

The article you put out suggests they would be armed - which is what I drew the issue with them on.
Yes a long loiter Ultra High Altitude system is great - however if you see the optical packages on the NRO satellites (they had better than Hubble stuff years before Hubble - and had a spare array lying outdoors in their boneyard when NASA needed a Hubble fix) they are not going to fit on one of those airframe -- while they can get some data, they aren't pulling up the UHD imagery a NRO satellite can.


As I addressed above, if you look at the size of some of NRO's "Spy Satellites", the optical sensors are significantly beyond the payload of those aircraft - and you don't get the same sort of return -- same with the U-2A we still fly -- it does some work -- but generally one needs to task a KH-11 for detailed imagery.



The F-22 is still the worlds premium AS fighter -- it was well before the F-35

In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king.
Having AS and being able to deep strike and deny launch areas to the enemy is what those high end fighters offer.


Yes, and those F-35's gave Israel the ability to to strike all over the area without significant concerns.
The F-35 be itself isn't a shield.

It is both -- a patrol system and a strike system.

Again I think you are missing the Forest for the trees

Unlike your paymastet we can seldom afford the likes of the Hubble telescope.

Some of us may have to rely on a bunch of less effective individual lenses and try to put the pieces of the puzzle together ourselves.

Kind of like this.

Fortunately we now have AI and Chatbots to help us work our way through combinations and permutations rapidly.

Both forest and trees are seen.

 

[armrdsoul77]

So how does that apply to F-35s in foreign service? Does that RCAF maintainers would be able to make simple repairs on our F-35s and require LockMart contractors to do the work?

Maybe the service manuals on CD can be obtained from WeChat marketplace?