SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The US Air Force's 56th Fighter Wing at Luke Air Force Base in Arizona today cancelled "local flying operations" for F-35A fighters after five incidents in which pilots "experienced hypoxia-like symptoms," an Air Force spokesperson said in a statement. Hypoxia is a deficiency in oxygen reaching the body through the circulatory system.
"In order to synchronize operations and maintenance efforts toward safe flying operations we have cancelled local F-35A flying," said 56th Fighter Wing commander Brigadier General Brook Leonard. "The Air Force takes these physiological incidents seriously, and our focus is on the safety and well-being of our pilots. We are taking the necessary steps to find the root cause of these incidents."
The cancellation of F-35A operations is currently restricted to Luke Air Force Base, the primary pilot training base for the F-35A. The Air Force also trains F-35A pilots at Eglin Air Force Base in Florida. The 56th Fighter Wing's squadrons at Luke train pilots from the US Air Force as well as from other nations buying the F-35A, including Norway, Italy, and Australia. All the pilots training at Luke will be briefed on the incidents and on the procedures the pilots affected used to successfully restore oxygen and land the aircraft safely, a 56th Fighter Wing spokesperson said. The 56th's Air Operations Group will also hold a forum with pilots to discuss their concerns.
Source: ArsTechnica
According to Wikipedia:
The Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II is a family of single-seat, single-engine, all-weather stealth multirole fighters. The fifth-generation combat aircraft is designed to perform ground attack and air defense missions. It has three main models: the F-35A conventional takeoff and landing (CTOL) variant, the F-35B short take-off and vertical-landing (STOVL) variant, and the F-35C carrier-based Catapult Assisted Take-Off Barrier Arrested Recovery (CATOBAR) variant. On 31 July 2015, the United States Marines declared ready for deployment the first squadron of F-35B fighters after intensive testing. On 2 August 2016, the U.S. Air Force declared its first squadron of F-35A fighters combat-ready.
The F-35 development program has been plagued with cost overruns and delays. Current estimated costs per unit vary from $95m for the F35-A to $120m for the F35-B and F35-C.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 12 2017, @08:49PM (1 child)
Let them Suffocate.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Tuesday June 13 2017, @02:05AM
Yeah right [youtube.com]....
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 12 2017, @09:00PM (15 children)
I mean, if they can't make systems work properly for $100 million per unit, you know these things are lemons.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by julian on Monday June 12 2017, @09:24PM (13 children)
Cost is also a strategic flaw of the F-35. It's so costly to operate that pilots will necessarily receive less in-air training hours than other aircraft, and other country's pilots. They'll be less experienced, and less competitive. And simulator time is not a substitute for the real thing.
We probably would have been better off doing another round of upgrades to the F-15/16/18 and A-10.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Thexalon on Monday June 12 2017, @09:56PM (3 children)
Yeah, but on the upside, the ridiculous cost ensures that the US government will continue to transfer ungodly sums of money from the public treasury to Lockheed Martin and its subsidiaries. And that was the whole point of the exercise.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Tuesday June 13 2017, @12:41AM (1 child)
100 $100M planes or 1000 $10M planes the profits the same but pilot survival is higher in the latter.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday June 13 2017, @02:39AM
Your math is a little bit to simple. You have to factor in *WHO* gets the money, and how much they get. The F35 has it's very own system of graft and corruption, and going back to the older, more proven aircraft would have cut some important people out of the loop. It's easy to hide a lot of money laundering in a newer program, where you can claim research and development. It's a lot tougher to launder money in an older, established system where everyone has a very good idea what the real costs are.
(Score: 2) by driverless on Tuesday June 13 2017, @05:12AM
Yep, and that's why all military procurement is done in two phases, "it's too early to tell" and "it's too late to stop".
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Monday June 12 2017, @10:15PM (8 children)
That's weird; one of the big arguments I've seen when people defend the F-35 is that the maintenance costs are a fraction of those for older jets (just like modern cars need a fraction of the maintenance of 70s cars). Of course, the up-front cost is higher, but maintenance costs and downtime are big factors for the military, and supposedly the F-35 excels here.
(Score: 2) by NewNic on Monday June 12 2017, @10:23PM (6 children)
Cost per hour of operation is what counts.
The Air Force generals are showing their financial illiteracy by attempting to kill the A10. The F35 is so expensive to operate [businessinsider.com] that, by using the A10 when they can, the air force would be able to procure and have available for active use more F35s. Instead, these generals want to kill the A10, and fly the wings off the F35 and F22 fleet at much higher cost.
The F35 is only cheap when compared to the F22.
lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Monday June 12 2017, @10:38PM (2 children)
A couple of problems here:
1) The F-35 is cheaper per flight-hour than the V-22 (according to your link), as well as the B-2, so it's not only cheap compared to the F-22. Of course, it really isn't meant for the same kinds of missions as those.
2) This article doesn't show the flight-hour costs of the F-15, F-16, or F-18. The F-35 is supposed to eventually replace those planes too, not just the A-10.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday June 13 2017, @02:47AM (1 child)
I'm not so sure about all those claims for cost per hour. Let's consider automobiles for a minute. A new car generally runs pretty cheaply, because it needs little to no maintenance. Assuming you pay cash, you have a big payment upfront, then you drive for two to four years, quite cheaply. When you get tired of your car, you sell it, and the aging vehicle becomes another person's headache. That car looks great to you, because it ran well, it ran cheaply. The new owner, however, has bought an aging vehicle, which is going to require more and more maintenance as time goes on. The car looks less great to him, because it is more costly to operate. He drives it for a couple years, and sells it - and that new owner can look forward to increased maintenance costs.
Back to the aircraft. Are they comparing the costs per hour for NEW F-15's, or for the aged relics already in service? Aircraft with already stressed frames, and dozens of repairs, some of which may be merely "adequate"? Aircraft with obsolete and/or worn out electronic components, maybe?
Had the military ordered NEW F-16, A-10, and F-18 craft be built, the equation would probably look a lot different.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Tuesday June 13 2017, @04:50AM
That's a good question, but aircraft, even brand-new ones, require a significant amount of maintenance, and aren't really engineered like cars are to be mostly maintenance-free. After all, when an aircraft has a mechanical failure, that frequently means a crash. So they have to get various things done at certain hour-intervals, and then a full overhaul at some fixed point. With cars, they just seal everything up so that regular lubrication isn't needed (I mean the bearings/suspension here), and then you just replace it whenever it goes bad, which these days is typically beyond 100k miles, and you drive it until something breaks in the engine.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Monday June 12 2017, @10:42PM (2 children)
Here's another article [time.com] from 2013 showing the flight-hour costs of many more AF planes. Looks like the F-35 is cheaper than the F-15, but not the F-16. The F-18 isn't listed here (it's not Air Force) but a google search comes up with around $25k.
(Score: 2) by NewNic on Monday June 12 2017, @10:58PM (1 child)
All those numbers do is support my premise that, by flying the A10 instead of the F35 for missions where the A10 is suitable, more A35 can eventually be fielded should the time come that we need to field F35s.
I also think that you have to take the F35 numbers with a very large pinch of salt. I suspect that, once actually deployed in significant numbers and any fudging of the numbers become more difficult, the per-hour flight costs may increase, although I will concede that a single engine design may help to contain costs in comparison to a twin-engine design.
lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 13 2017, @12:04AM
You have entirely missed what the metaphor is saying.
(Where I'm from, we say "with a grain of salt", which makes the point more clearly.)
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 13 2017, @12:03AM
I'm not an accountant or actuary, but I think replacing pilots who suffocate is probably one of the more expensive parts of an F-35.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 12 2017, @09:40PM
One of the arguments about why the '35 is so tricky is because in theory the Air Force has to gamble a bit to stay ahead of the competition (enemies). If you use "safe" choices, you won't be ahead of the competition. New fighter planes have often had kinks that took time to iron out. Too little gambling and you are behind the curve, too much and you have a risky or useless plane. Even if you target a middle ground, you sometimes get it wrong: nobody has a perfect crystal ball.
Vietnam-era jets were designed with the assumption that straight-on speed, guided missiles, and powerful radar would reduce the need for dog-fights and so were not well-suited for dog-fights. Unfortunately, the Ruskies eventually found tactics to force them into dog-fights, putting the US in a bind for a while. (In part because guided missiles were not very reliable yet.)
The WW2 p-38 was potentially so fast for its time that they were hesitant to test scale-models at full speed in wind-tunnels because the voltage needed to emulate full speed broke the wind-tunnels, which were in short supply during the war. Thus, it took a while to tune them to take full advantage of their speed.
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 12 2017, @09:06PM (7 children)
turning the air off and on again?
(Score: 3, Funny) by bob_super on Monday June 12 2017, @09:31PM (3 children)
No air? The procedure recommends opening the window. Big red handle in the middle of the seat.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 12 2017, @10:49PM (2 children)
Okay ... Oh oh, where's the UNDO button!
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Monday June 12 2017, @11:46PM (1 child)
Ultimate DLC: it's a $150,000,000 to respawn.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 13 2017, @04:09PM
But I spent it all on Lockheed Martin stock.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Ethanol-fueled on Monday June 12 2017, @11:41PM (1 child)
Well, it was a joke, but that's kinda how pressure-swing adsorption works, the "on-off" being the pressure swings within the chambers to get them to do what they do. They make a "puffing and chugging" sound like a miniature steam-engine.
I've worked on this technology before (though not the kind for aircraft cockpits) -- it is temperamental and prone to failure and just fucking sucks. The idea is that you don't have to carry a supply of Oxygen that can be depleted, because you have a device which magically purifies ambient air to high percentages of Oxygen. Until your gadget fails and you're fuckled. With a finite supply of reliable O2 you at least know when your supply will run out and plan accordingly. But nowadays it's all about muh high-endurance stealth. The decision to use that technology for airborne life-support was dumb, dumb, dumb.
It also probably doesn't help that the intake air comes right from the engine bleed system. Whoever thought of that one should be keel-hauled on a center pylon at 10,000 Ft of altitude. Molecular sieve is rather finicky and if there is the slightest bit of the wrong chemicals going into it, the sieve will fail.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 13 2017, @12:31AM
...and we've been here before with the F-22.
So, if they follow the established pattern of putting beta- (or even alpha-) quality stuff on production systems, they'll be adding MORE stuff as a backup for the finicky stuff on the F-35.
The callout "Gold-plated turkey" has been used here before to reference this boondoggle.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Tuesday June 13 2017, @02:16PM
Hello dear sir. This is F35 tech support call center. How may I be pleased to be helping you today?
Pilot: The life support system isn't working!
Tech: Can you please to be giving me the serial number of the aircraft so I can be verifying your tech support eligibility dear sir?
Pilot: I don't have time for this, I'm getting close to the battle zone.
Tech: Can you please to be holding while I am looking up your problem?
Pilot: Um, no I can't really hold . . .
( . . . silence . . . )
Pilot: Hello?
( . . . silence . . . )
Tech: Hello sir? Are you still to be being on the line?
Pilot: Yeah, I'm still here . . . wheeze . . but I'm having trouble breathing.
Tech: Have you tried to be turning the air off and then back on again?
Pilot: Yes, I have tried that . . . wheeze . . . I am not getting any oxygen!
Tech: Have you tried holding your breath?
Pilot: I can't hold my breath, I'm almost to the battle!
Tech: The recommended procedure is to be holding your breath until you can land safely the aircraft sir.
Pilot: I can't breathe! (gasp) And I'm getting close to the enemy and . . .
(explosion sound)
Tech: Sir?
Tech: Sir, are you there?
Tech: Since you no longer are seeming to be experiencing a problem, I am going to log this support issue as resolved successfully.
Tech: Are you to be having any disagreement with that sir?
( . . . silence . . . )
Tech: Ok, I thought not. Thank you and I hope you are to be having a nice day.
When trying to solve a problem don't ask who suffers from the problem, ask who profits from the problem.
(Score: 2) by looorg on Monday June 12 2017, @09:07PM (1 child)
[speculation mode activated] So I wonder which it could be, there seems to be so many issues or possibilities to pick from. To high altitude, flying to high or higher then they should; problem with the aircraft, same reason then probably as in can't it fly as high as the specs promised with out the life support system or some other system failing. Perhaps there is some kind of leak or is there a problem with the flight suits cutting off circulation a little to much? Perhaps humans have finally become the weakest link.
Auch! At first that seems like a bit of an issue. At the same time what kind of lightweight pilot weighs 62 kg - that is some serious girly weight right there. Which I guess was the issue -- they just didn't want to point that out. Sorry ladies, you gotta be this large to get on this ride! Yiiii-ha!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 12 2017, @09:42PM
> So I wonder which it could be, there seems to be so many issues or possibilities to pick from
most probable: the aircraft is secretly built in china to cheat the taxpayer out of some millions, but the chinese figured out there was no hollywood movie about some funny transformer aircraft and shipped faulty items, soon the sky is filled with chinese f40-5 which give the correct amount of oxygen, and perform a shiatsu massage on demand.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday June 12 2017, @09:11PM (1 child)
Have you tried not flying it?
Some pilots refuse to fly F-22 Raptor amid jet's oxygen problems [latimes.com]
F-22 Raptor stealth jets to get automatic backup oxygen systems to prevent new hypoxia-like symptoms [theaviationist.com]
Navy Instructor Pilots Refusing to Fly (T-45) Over Safety Concerns [military.com]
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday June 12 2017, @09:15PM
That is what they are trying right now.
They might want to try a pilot support system that doesn't systematically create hypoxic pilots during flight operations.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by its_gonna_be_yuge! on Monday June 12 2017, @09:23PM
I think we're waiting to jump in once revision "F" hits the skies
(Score: 3, Funny) by krishnoid on Monday June 12 2017, @09:25PM
but it ended up sucking all the air out of the room.
(Score: 5, Funny) by Bot on Monday June 12 2017, @09:50PM
from the website: [f35.com]
"The supersonic, multi-role F-35 represents a quantum leap in air dominance capability with enhanced lethality..."
they warned you...
Account abandoned.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 12 2017, @10:06PM (1 child)
They seem to have O2 problems in multiple planes.
Is O2 in a fighter a hard problem, or has the pentagon just lost the recipe?
(Score: 3, Interesting) by VLM on Tuesday June 13 2017, @12:38AM
You can make it a hard problem by cutting weight, volume, and power until it stops working.
Also to be honest a lot of 70s crashes semi-CFIT they just blamed the hell out of the pilot for being a dumbass. Now a days a dude augers in and cheap cameras everywhere means they play back the video where the pilot clearly passed out at altitude and trying to cover that up as hotdog flying or whatever BS is a bit tougher.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Snotnose on Tuesday June 13 2017, @12:15AM (2 children)
From 3-4 years ago? Pilots passing out due to lack of O2 is the first F35 failure I remember reading about.
I understand it's new, and new things take a while to debug. But Jeebus Christo, if you can't feed oxygen to the pilot you've failed Building Fighter Jets 101.
/ oh, you can't shoot the gun? shoot
// oh, rain dissolves the radar avoiding skin? dang
/// oh, it costs so much per plane no sane person in charge is going to put one in harms way? This friends is a real problem.
When the dust settled America realized it was saved by a porn star.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 13 2017, @01:27AM (1 child)
That was F22, and it ground the whole fleet of them.
(Score: 2) by sgleysti on Tuesday June 13 2017, @01:59AM
I googled up some relevant articles
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/f-22-grounding-continues-as-oxygen-safety-probe-wide-358103/ [flightglobal.com]
http://www.airforce-technology.com/news/newsroot-cause-f22-raptor-hypoxia-identified-usaf [airforce-technology.com]
https://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/dotmil/2012/05/25/lockheed-f-35-oxygen-system-very-different-than-troubled-sibling [usnews.com]
Oxygen problems also appear to be affecting the F-18
http://breakingdefense.com/2016/02/oxygen-problems-afflict-297-navy-marine-hornets/ [breakingdefense.com]
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Tuesday June 13 2017, @02:18AM (1 child)
Turn 'em into UAVs. Then they'll get their money's worth. Why are we still sending pilots up anyway?
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 13 2017, @06:04AM
Nobody seems willing to approve full-AI killers, but that is what you need when the radio links are all destroyed by the enemy. In a serious war, the satellites are even gone. There is no GPS.
Many prior generations have made peace after a huge war and thought to themselves that THAT was the final war. It was the Great War, or the War To End All Wars, or some such nonsense, and a fresh new war between superpowers just wouldn't happen. Uh... the historical record indicates otherwise. We'll be fighting a war without satellites soon enough, and yes the nukes will go boom.
That said, UAV mode would be nice for shipping planes around the world. Maybe the pilots could even get some sleep in the cockpit.
(Score: 3, Funny) by realDonaldTrump on Tuesday June 13 2017, @09:55AM