User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 7:03:11 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryHowever, other issues are likely to hinder the program’s restart capabilities.
These issues include requalifying the vendor base, as well as concerns over the availability of skilled labor, processes, facilities, and tooling used by firms supporting F-22A production. All these issues are likely to affect suppliers’ ability to provide the same parts when production starts again as they provided when it closed down. Some parts will be technologically obsolete; in other cases, the facilities dedicated to making those parts will have closed down or will have been diverted to manufacturing other parts The first problem is that while Lockheed and the Air Force supposedly made every effort to carefully squirrel away the tooling and instructions for building the F-22, problems have emerged when maintenance crews have attempted to pull the equipment in order to repair damaged jets.
One recently retired Air Force official with direct knowledge about the service’s efforts to repair two damaged Raptors said that they faced severe difficulties with retrieving the correct tooling. In one example, Air Force maintainers needed to build a particular component from scratch to replace a severely damaged part for an F-22. The crews went into the Conex boxes where the tooling and instructions to build the part were allegedly stored, but to their considerable surprise and aggravation, the container was empty. The same pattern repeated itself several times—and as of the last time the source checked–the issue remains unresolved. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 7:04:18 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Ok, so it's amazing. That just reiterates my point that we should finish the F-35 instead of spending a shitload of money to restart production of a 30yo model. BTW, restarting production is almost certainly going to cost FAR more and take significantly longer than anyone predicts. Of course, this could be the first government-funded project in history that comes in on time and under budget, but I could also find a winning mega millions ticket on the ground tomorrow with Megan Fox's personal number on it. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Its not "decent"; the F-35 is already an amazing aircraft. It was meant as like a cheap Stealth replacement for the DO-ALL, F16. But those projections were pie in the sky. BTW, restarting production is almost certainly going to cost FAR more and take significantly longer than anyone predicts. Of course, this could be the first government-funded project in history that comes in on time and under budget, but I could also find a winning mega millions ticket on the ground tomorrow with Megan Fox's personal number on it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 7:10:18 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's a compromise plane, one air frame for the service branches. It will never be a master of anything. It's not a air superiority fighter, it does not have super cruise, it does not thrust vectoring. Sure it's got great electronics, but who says that a new F-22 would not have those and newer/better. My uncle said the next F-22 would be a B model or even a C model. The upgrade work really ended with production, he said the plane has many more untouched capabilities and has allot more to offer than we know. He has said the F-35 will never be in the same class as the F-22 as far as far as air superiority. It's going to be the motherfucker that tells everyone else what the fuck to do and how to do it. The F-22 suffers from the same issues that the F-18A-D suffers from, there's no room for growth. They built the aircraft around the avionics and bomb bay. You can only stuff 5 pounds of shit into a sock that holds 5 pounds. If the Super Size it, that's a different story. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 7:21:11 PM EDT
[#4]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 7:22:07 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yep we are going to need a lot of airframes not just a few dozen stealth fighters in any all out war. 300 brand new F-15s will replace all of the F-15C models currently in service plus double the current F-15 strength if you don't include the Strike Eagles. Reactivate some Cold War squadrons and fill them up. Have the Navy buy some more Growlers and get the Marine Corps into the game since their Prowlers are going out to compensate for lack of stealth. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Buy 300 new F-15's as a stop gap measure as we await the F-22 replacement since the production line is still open. We need actual airframes to do the missions. Yes I know they're 2 seat models only but it's still the best thing available that's still being made It is not like a new, even better Eagle with modern avionics would have many credible threats against them. I just hate how we sell them like candy these days.....I hope we install some sort of kill switch on those. When the new F-22s start showing up again then you can retire all the A/C models and maybe some of the oldest Es. Supposedly the airframes on the E were so much improved though they can fly for years to come without the same issues with wing failures. 300 brand new F-15s will replace all of the F-15C models currently in service plus double the current F-15 strength if you don't include the Strike Eagles. Reactivate some Cold War squadrons and fill them up. Have the Navy buy some more Growlers and get the Marine Corps into the game since their Prowlers are going out to compensate for lack of stealth. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 7:25:16 PM EDT
[#6]
We need more F35s
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 7:32:22 PM EDT
[#7]
So for you experts out there (and I mean that seriously) how much more difficult would it be to restart the F22 program as sort of a 'Super Lightning' (upgraded a/c) versus like the Super Hornet (versus Hornet) or the F-15E (versus F-15C)?
Personally I'd love to see sort of an advanced F-16 using what we learned from the F-22 and 35 projects. A relatively cheap, lightweight fighter. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 7:35:04 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Tooling for bending and forging the big metal bits will still be around. Those aren't the problem. It's the thousands of other parts that aren't made anymore by companies that don't exist that were staffed by people who have retired, changed careers or have other jobs to do. You could make something that looks like an f22, but it'd have all new guts and that'd cost more then we are likely willing to pay for and take so long it'd probably not be all that relevant. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Do we even have the tooling any more? DoD is infamous for destroying tooling when the program is over. You could make something that looks like an f22, but it'd have all new guts and that'd cost more then we are likely willing to pay for and take so long it'd probably not be all that relevant. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 7:39:40 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Trump will not win a single primary.  Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Won't happen. Ever.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 7:41:51 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Okay, how does it work? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I know you don't know. But, spares and squadron aircraft useage and availability don't work like that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 7:44:07 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Interesting thing to note. The USMC and the USAF don't have any jammers. If I recall the USN operates some Growler squadrons embedded into the USAF? What is the USMC's plan? I know they're trying their hardest not to get any Super Hornets. https://www.cnic.navy.mil/regions/cnrnw/installations/nas_whidbey_island/about/tenant_commands/390th-electronic-combat-squadron.html Don't tell anyone this, when the USMC gets their full complement of F-35B's and they get all of the NGJ's they ordered they won't need the Navy's Growlers or their EA-6B's. You didn't hear this from me. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 7:50:41 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Two important points. Squadrons aren't used for "parts aircraft" no matter the vintage. Also, aircraft delivered to a squadron don't include "spares". 26 aircraft delivered means 26 aircraft in the rotation. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 7:50:44 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Two important points. Squadrons aren't used for "parts aircraft" no matter the vintage. Also, aircraft delivered to a squadron don't include "spares". 26 aircraft delivered means 26 aircraft in the rotation.     
Never heard of the hangar queen concept of maintenance I take it. Second Point -
Spares are bought with the aircraft and placed into the "spares pool" for that aircraft via the supply system. While the actual squadron might not see the spare nuts and bolts rest assured that they were bought and they are in the supply system. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 7:52:37 PM EDT
[#14]
300+ more F35s would be a better stop gap until the 6th gen stuff becomes real.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 7:54:37 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The F-22 suffers from the same issues that the F-18A-D suffers from, there's no room for growth. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 8:01:46 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This, and I had a uncle who was a engineer for LM, and he has said everything was saved and carfully stored as they have always planned on a restart. He stated a year or so ago when we're talking about it, even if 5 years or more went by every last thing about that plane and it's production was saved. He even stated that unused materials were saved and stored. He said the biggest problem and time consumer would be setting up a factory and getting the equipment into place. They could start training people pretty quick and actually have that all completed in time for hand on training. He said never in his history has he seen such a complete and care disassembly and storage of tools and equipment. He said everything was photographed and videoed of where stuff went and how it was disassembled. When it was moved into a different storage area to free up room for F-35 production it was re-stored in a way that the fist stuff out, is the first to be installed. Everyone has to be cleared. With the Chinese hack of F-35 with the thumb drive, it's a very difficult process to vet everyone and maintain program security. It still can be done with the right leadership. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 8:01:51 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The F-22 didn't appear to have been designed for ease of manufacturing. Some of the composite parts I saw used some unique processes that aren't really common in the industry. composite tooling in this industry isn't quick or easy to get up and going. There is always some trial and error before the bond jigs and such are making decent and repeatable parts, the composite materials used now are different ( better in every way) from the stuff used in the 1990s. tool design and build are much better and faster than they used to be. Those "unique processes" are now better and fairly commonplace and it's much more efficient to tool, lay up, cure, and trim a composite part. a year to design a layup tool? maybe if the design guys keep changing the part design. give a tooling guy a released model and the tool design is measured in weeks, with build and QC taking a few more weeks. here's a good breakdown of layup tooling concerns; keep in mind that for every composite part mold there is probably a holding fixture for trim, as well as bond tools to position and hold multiple parts for join. layup tooling 787 then you have the assembly tooling... |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 8:04:05 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The F-22 has ample accommodation for avionics growth. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 8:07:26 PM EDT
[#19]
The F-22's were bad ass, I'm glad they are bringing it back. I bet the crew chiefs on the F-15's are glad also. They would love to ditch those old broken down jets with new F-22's.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 8:10:05 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
it doesn't matter. a carbon-copy F-22 won't be built. the composite materials used now are different ( better in every way) from the stuff used in the 1990s. tool design and build are much better and faster than they used to be. Those "unique processes" are now better and fairly commonplace and it's much more efficient to tool, lay up, cure, and trim a composite part. a year to design a layup tool? maybe if the design guys keep changing the part design. give a tooling guy a released model and the tool design is measured in weeks, with build and QC taking a few more weeks. here's a good breakdown of layup tooling concerns; keep in mind that for every composite part mold there is probably a holding fixture for trim, as well as bond tools to position and hold multiple parts for join. layup tooling 787 then you have the assembly tooling... |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 8:10:33 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
300+ more F35s would be a better stop gap until the 6th gen stuff becomes real. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 8:10:48 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That's not what I heard from a E3 USAF Security guys girlfriend I was banging one night right before I left for Macho Grande... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The F-22 has ample accommodation for avionics growth. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 8:13:42 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
We really don't know what exactly what or what not is used, we also don't know what the exact process is either. I do know that it can be done and it would be better. are you Donald Rumsfeld?  Donald Rumsfeld Unknown Unknowns ! |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 8:13:48 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
At some point in time people will grasp the concept that the F-35 is not an "Air Superiority" fighter, that it's not a bomb truck and that it's not a CAS aircraft. It's going to be the motherfucker that tells everyone else what the fuck to do and how to do it. The F-22 suffers from the same issues that the F-18A-D suffers from, there's no room for growth. They built the aircraft around the avionics and bomb bay. You can only stuff 5 pounds of shit into a sock that holds 5 pounds. If the Super Size it, that's a different story. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 8:17:18 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Like, what the hell is this? So, in order to ensure the spread of accurate third hand information, I've got to go around banging everyone's girlfriend? I ain't got time for that. 2.1 Common Integrated Processor (CIP) The Hughes-built Common Integrated Processor (CIP) is the 'brain' of the avionics system. The CIP, which is quite literally the size of a oversized bread box, supports all signal and data processing for all sensors and mission avionics. There are two CIPs in each F-22, with 66 module slots per CIP. They have identical backplanes, and all of the F-22's processing requirements can be handled by only seven different types of processors. Currently, 19 of 66 slots in CIP 1 and 22 of 66 slots in CIP 2 are not in use and can be used for future growth. Each module is limited by design to only 75 percent of its capability, so the F-22 has thirty percent growth capability with no change to the existing equipment. There is space, power, and cooling provisions in the aircraft now for a third CIP, so the requirement for a 200 percent avionics growth capability in the F-22 can be met easily. CIP also contains mission software that uses tailorable mission planning data for sensor emitter management and multisensor fusion; mission-specific information delivered to system through Fairchild data transfer equipment that also contains mass storage for default data and air vehicle operational flight programme; General purpose processing capacity of CIP is rated at more than 700 million instructions per second (Mips) with growth to 2,000 Mips; signal processing capacity greater than 20 billion operations per second (Bops) with expansion capability to 50 Bops; CIP contains more than 300 Mbytes of memory with growth potential to 650 Mbytes. Intra-flight data link automatically shares tactical information between two or more F-22s. Airframe contains provisions for IRST and side-mounted phased-array radar. http://www.f22fighter.com/avionics.htm |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 8:19:50 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The USAF has aircrew embedded within the Navy's "Expeditionary" squadrons. https://www.cnic.navy.mil/regions/cnrnw/installations/nas_whidbey_island/about/tenant_commands/390th-electronic-combat-squadron.html Don't tell anyone this, when the USMC gets their full complement of F-35B's and they get all of the NGJ's they ordered they won't need the Navy's Growlers or their EA-6B's. You didn't hear this from me. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Interesting thing to note. The USMC and the USAF don't have any jammers. If I recall the USN operates some Growler squadrons embedded into the USAF? What is the USMC's plan? I know they're trying their hardest not to get any Super Hornets. https://www.cnic.navy.mil/regions/cnrnw/installations/nas_whidbey_island/about/tenant_commands/390th-electronic-combat-squadron.html Don't tell anyone this, when the USMC gets their full complement of F-35B's and they get all of the NGJ's they ordered they won't need the Navy's Growlers or their EA-6B's. You didn't hear this from me. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 8:23:56 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryI know what is used, what was used and what would most likely be used. The materials haven't evolved much since the 90's really. There is a lot of work being done with out of autoclave stuff, some of the processes have evolved, but not the ones I was speaking of.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 8:25:59 PM EDT
[#28]
I love/hate these threads.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 8:29:13 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
First point -
Never heard of the hangar queen concept of maintenance I take it. Second Point -
Spares are bought with the aircraft and placed into the "spares pool" for that aircraft via the supply system. While the actual squadron might not see the spare nuts and bolts rest assured that they were bought and they are in the supply system. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Two important points. Squadrons aren't used for "parts aircraft" no matter the vintage. Also, aircraft delivered to a squadron don't include "spares". 26 aircraft delivered means 26 aircraft in the rotation.
Never heard of the hangar queen concept of maintenance I take it. Second Point -
Spares are bought with the aircraft and placed into the "spares pool" for that aircraft via the supply system. While the actual squadron might not see the spare nuts and bolts rest assured that they were bought and they are in the supply system.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 8:33:10 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Two important points. Squadrons aren't used for "parts aircraft" no matter the vintage. Also, aircraft delivered to a squadron don't include "spares". 26 aircraft delivered means 26 aircraft in the rotation. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I know you don't know. But, spares and squadron aircraft useage and availability don't work like that. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 8:40:45 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Really? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I know you don't know. But, spares and squadron aircraft useage and availability don't work like that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 8:40:52 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
At some point in time people will grasp the concept that the F-35 is not an "Air Superiority" fighter, that it's not a bomb truck and that it's not a CAS aircraft. It's going to be the motherfucker that tells everyone else what the fuck to do and how to do it. We are supposed to be buying a shit load of JSF so anyone who thinks it won't be hauling bombs is mistaken. JSF is a better "Air Superiority" fighter than the F-15C and second only to the Raptor world wide. What bomb trucks and CAS airframes will the Marines F-35Bs be directing? A JSF can carry more ordnance externally than the F-18 or F-16 with longer legs and we will have more of them according to the plan. Even dirtied up with external stores JSF should be able to operate in less permissive environments than any 4th Gen. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 8:41:46 PM EDT
[#33]
Carbon fiber production has improved drastically since F-22 IOC and final production even.
The stuff they are doing local to me is pretty impressive for aerospace industry. If you look at the ability to make larger structures that have less parts, are stronger, and lighter weight, a new F-22 production line could be streamlined somewhat from the original. Look at what has happened with aerospace performance goals for fuel efficiency and noise cancellation using carbon fiber, then think about how the internal stealth structure of the F-22 would benefit. Laminates have gotten better, 3D modeling has gotten better, prototyping has gotten better. Problem is you would also need to re-do flight testing for the airframe and any new structures. Good thing is they have a lot of operational data for the F-119 engines. A lighter, stronger F-22 would be crazy in thrust-to-weight ratio, stores carrying capacity, and room for growth. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 8:44:41 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I sure ain't got time to read all dat! 2.1 Common Integrated Processor (CIP) The Hughes-built Common Integrated Processor (CIP) is the 'brain' of the avionics system. The CIP, which is quite literally the size of a oversized bread box, supports all signal and data processing for all sensors and mission avionics. There are two CIPs in each F-22, with 66 module slots per CIP. They have identical backplanes, and all of the F-22's processing requirements can be handled by only seven different types of processors. Currently, 19 of 66 slots in CIP 1 and 22 of 66 slots in CIP 2 are not in use and can be used for future growth. Each module is limited by design to only 75 percent of its capability, so the F-22 has thirty percent growth capability with no change to the existing equipment. There is space, power, and cooling provisions in the aircraft now for a third CIP, so the requirement for a 200 percent avionics growth capability in the F-22 can be met easily. CIP also contains mission software that uses tailorable mission planning data for sensor emitter management and multisensor fusion; mission-specific information delivered to system through Fairchild data transfer equipment that also contains mass storage for default data and air vehicle operational flight programme; General purpose processing capacity of CIP is rated at more than 700 million instructions per second (Mips) with growth to 2,000 Mips; signal processing capacity greater than 20 billion operations per second (Bops) with expansion capability to 50 Bops; CIP contains more than 300 Mbytes of memory with growth potential to 650 Mbytes. Intra-flight data link automatically shares tactical information between two or more F-22s. Airframe contains provisions for IRST and side-mounted phased-array radar. http://www.f22fighter.com/avionics.htm Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Like, what the hell is this? So, in order to ensure the spread of accurate third hand information, I've got to go around banging everyone's girlfriend? I ain't got time for that. 2.1 Common Integrated Processor (CIP) The Hughes-built Common Integrated Processor (CIP) is the 'brain' of the avionics system. The CIP, which is quite literally the size of a oversized bread box, supports all signal and data processing for all sensors and mission avionics. There are two CIPs in each F-22, with 66 module slots per CIP. They have identical backplanes, and all of the F-22's processing requirements can be handled by only seven different types of processors. Currently, 19 of 66 slots in CIP 1 and 22 of 66 slots in CIP 2 are not in use and can be used for future growth. Each module is limited by design to only 75 percent of its capability, so the F-22 has thirty percent growth capability with no change to the existing equipment. There is space, power, and cooling provisions in the aircraft now for a third CIP, so the requirement for a 200 percent avionics growth capability in the F-22 can be met easily. CIP also contains mission software that uses tailorable mission planning data for sensor emitter management and multisensor fusion; mission-specific information delivered to system through Fairchild data transfer equipment that also contains mass storage for default data and air vehicle operational flight programme; General purpose processing capacity of CIP is rated at more than 700 million instructions per second (Mips) with growth to 2,000 Mips; signal processing capacity greater than 20 billion operations per second (Bops) with expansion capability to 50 Bops; CIP contains more than 300 Mbytes of memory with growth potential to 650 Mbytes. Intra-flight data link automatically shares tactical information between two or more F-22s. Airframe contains provisions for IRST and side-mounted phased-array radar. http://www.f22fighter.com/avionics.htm |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 8:58:44 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So, serious question here -- how does someone get into avionics software development? Do any of our resident experts here know? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 9:00:33 PM EDT
[#36]
We should start building them yesterday.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 9:00:47 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yes. Aircraft aren't delivered with the intent to be used as parts aircraft (again, the CANN program notwithstanding). Parts are generally included in the contract to buy a certain lot of aircraft. We don't just go and take them off other aircraft unless required. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I know you don't know. But, spares and squadron aircraft useage and availability don't work like that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 9:05:30 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Do you work for DLA? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I know you don't know. But, spares and squadron aircraft useage and availability don't work like that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 9:12:25 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How much more difficult would it be to restart the F22 program as sort of a 'Super Lightning' (upgraded a/c) versus like the Super Hornet (versus Hornet) or the F-15E (versus F-15C)? Personally I'd love to see sort of an advanced F-16 using what we learned from the F-22 and 35 projects. A relatively cheap, lightweight fighter. They cost more than the F-35A/B/C and F-22A. "Advanced" nowadays means IRST, FADEC, DFLCS, AESA, CFTs, integrated weapons capabilities, electro-optical targeting systems, ASPJ (Advanced Self Protection Jammer ECM and ECCM suite), glass cockpit, JHMCS, Improved Performance Engine, data link, etc. Each one of those components or sub-systems averages millions of dollars. The "lower cost" systems are in the hundreds of thousands, even for the helmet. AESA radars and FADEC/DFLCS Improved Performance Engines are millions each. You start with a base airframe that costs tens of millions, then start adding on a few million here, a few million there. It adds up, then you have a $200 million F-16, which was meant to be a cheap, lightweight day fighter to beat the MiG-21 at everything. None of them individually or collectively are on-par with what the F-35 has, where it was conceived, designed, engineered, and is being continually tested with all of these capabilities in mind, plus several other generational capabilities that the teen fighters never had and don't have the provision for structurally or with their upgrade architecture. If you want advanced and low cost, the arrows go in opposite directions for your request. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 9:20:50 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So, serious question here -- how does someone get into avionics software development? Do any of our resident experts here know? check with Embry-Riddle for aircraft-specific software education. once you have the education, check the websites for Boeing, Lockheed Martin, etc. They all have systems for you to apply to jobs online. once you put your resume on their site for one job, HR will search the site for skills and find you if you're a match. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 9:23:27 PM EDT
[#41]
Replace it with a good drone. Fighter planes are just a flying gun (or flying missile base).
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 9:24:45 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
it doesn't matter. a carbon-copy F-22 won't be built. the composite materials used now are different ( better in every way) from the stuff used in the 1990s. tool design and build are much better and faster than they used to be. Those "unique processes" are now better and fairly commonplace and it's much more efficient to tool, lay up, cure, and trim a composite part. a year to design a layup tool? maybe if the design guys keep changing the part design. give a tooling guy a released model and the tool design is measured in weeks, with build and QC taking a few more weeks. here's a good breakdown of layup tooling concerns; keep in mind that for every composite part mold there is probably a holding fixture for trim, as well as bond tools to position and hold multiple parts for join. layup tooling 787 then you have the assembly tooling... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The F-22 didn't appear to have been designed for ease of manufacturing. Some of the composite parts I saw used some unique processes that aren't really common in the industry. composite tooling in this industry isn't quick or easy to get up and going. There is always some trial and error before the bond jigs and such are making decent and repeatable parts, the composite materials used now are different ( better in every way) from the stuff used in the 1990s. tool design and build are much better and faster than they used to be. Those "unique processes" are now better and fairly commonplace and it's much more efficient to tool, lay up, cure, and trim a composite part. a year to design a layup tool? maybe if the design guys keep changing the part design. give a tooling guy a released model and the tool design is measured in weeks, with build and QC taking a few more weeks. here's a good breakdown of layup tooling concerns; keep in mind that for every composite part mold there is probably a holding fixture for trim, as well as bond tools to position and hold multiple parts for join. layup tooling 787 then you have the assembly tooling... The issue isn't designing the bond tools, maybe, the problem is getting the cure cycles sorted out, and that is not a fall out of making drawings. If sufficient development is done before building parts, there is a good chance the correct materials and design will be selected for the bond tool so that CTE mismatches are minimized or at least understood and controllable by the cure process. Legacy airplanes use legacy materials for the major airframe parts. The risk is too high to simply say, "we're not using that now, we're using this". We're going to see a move away from composites anyway, except for certain applications where there is no other choice, and nowadays, there's another choice; machined parts, including deep small radius of curvature skins. As it should be. Composites are the devils material, made from burnt string and glue. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 9:31:01 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
the software people I bumped into at Lockheed were Computer Science majors. Plenty of master's degrees there. check with Embry-Riddle for aircraft-specific software education. once you have the education, check the websites for Boeing, Lockheed Martin, etc. They all have systems for you to apply to jobs online. once you put your resume on their site for one job, HR will search the site for skills and find you if you're a match. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
So, serious question here -- how does someone get into avionics software development? Do any of our resident experts here know? check with Embry-Riddle for aircraft-specific software education. once you have the education, check the websites for Boeing, Lockheed Martin, etc. They all have systems for you to apply to jobs online. once you put your resume on their site for one job, HR will search the site for skills and find you if you're a match. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 9:32:07 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So, serious question here -- how does someone get into avionics software development? Do any of our resident experts here know? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Like, what the hell is this? So, in order to ensure the spread of accurate third hand information, I've got to go around banging everyone's girlfriend? I ain't got time for that. 2.1 Common Integrated Processor (CIP) The Hughes-built Common Integrated Processor (CIP) is the 'brain' of the avionics system. The CIP, which is quite literally the size of a oversized bread box, supports all signal and data processing for all sensors and mission avionics. There are two CIPs in each F-22, with 66 module slots per CIP. They have identical backplanes, and all of the F-22's processing requirements can be handled by only seven different types of processors. Currently, 19 of 66 slots in CIP 1 and 22 of 66 slots in CIP 2 are not in use and can be used for future growth. Each module is limited by design to only 75 percent of its capability, so the F-22 has thirty percent growth capability with no change to the existing equipment. There is space, power, and cooling provisions in the aircraft now for a third CIP, so the requirement for a 200 percent avionics growth capability in the F-22 can be met easily. CIP also contains mission software that uses tailorable mission planning data for sensor emitter management and multisensor fusion; mission-specific information delivered to system through Fairchild data transfer equipment that also contains mass storage for default data and air vehicle operational flight programme; General purpose processing capacity of CIP is rated at more than 700 million instructions per second (Mips) with growth to 2,000 Mips; signal processing capacity greater than 20 billion operations per second (Bops) with expansion capability to 50 Bops; CIP contains more than 300 Mbytes of memory with growth potential to 650 Mbytes. Intra-flight data link automatically shares tactical information between two or more F-22s. Airframe contains provisions for IRST and side-mounted phased-array radar. http://www.f22fighter.com/avionics.htm |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 9:37:16 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I've got the education, I have a feeling I don't have the specific skillsets they're looking for (ADA maybe?). It's something I'll be looking into over the next few years though -- I'm also going to get an MSCS, I have an MS in a slightly different but related field. a solid software background and real world .mil aviation experience may be enough to get you noticed; LM has a shitload of software people. how long til retirement for you? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 9:41:16 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
find out what you can through .mil sources you have and get some specific education, then. a solid software background and real world .mil aviation experience may be enough to get you noticed; LM has a shitload of software people. how long til retirement for you? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I've got the education, I have a feeling I don't have the specific skillsets they're looking for (ADA maybe?). It's something I'll be looking into over the next few years though -- I'm also going to get an MSCS, I have an MS in a slightly different but related field. a solid software background and real world .mil aviation experience may be enough to get you noticed; LM has a shitload of software people. how long til retirement for you? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 9:42:01 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Pretty sure it would be faster and cheaper to just increase the development tempo of Gen 6. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 9:42:33 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No. Unfortunately I have to deal with them from time to time though. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I know you don't know. But, spares and squadron aircraft useage and availability don't work like that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 9:46:10 PM EDT
[#49]
Question for the Subject Matter Experts in the thread: how is restarting the F22 production line different from Reagan restarting the B1 line in the 80s?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/21/2017 9:49:59 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Tooling for bending and forging the big metal bits will still be around. Those aren't the problem. It's the thousands of other parts that aren't made anymore by companies that don't exist that were staffed by people who have retired, changed careers or have other jobs to do. You could make something that looks like an f22, but it'd have all new guts and that'd cost more then we are likely willing to pay for and take so long it'd probably not be all that relevant. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
