F-35 to require state of art hangars with high pressure, low temperature dry air and controlled power supply

[Adar]

I think this marketing article might be the most brilliant case I have ever seen on epic civilian-military communication failure.

As an argument in favour of the F-35 the article start out with.

Over the last few years, Lockheed Martin has been busy manufacturing the world’s latest fighter attack jet. The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) with its three different variants is an example of the best of the best.
The F-35 JSF is a significantly different aircraft compared to legacy fighters, such as the F-18 and F-16, it’s designed to replace:

• The F-35 needs 270v DC ground power, not 400 Hz.
• It also needs high-pressure cold dry air supplied to it for ground operations.

Full production of the aircraft is not expected until 2019, but hangars have been in the works for more than four years. The new hangars that support this fantastic aircraft can’t be just ordinary hangars. They need to have the latest in technology and safety built into them. What used to work for hangar design doesn’t necessarily apply anymore.

So now we learn that the Marines rugged F-35 deployed in close proximity to the frontline is also supposed to enjoy the benefits of a state of art hangar in order for the aircraft to function properly.

Which will require a more sensitive power supply or the aircraft won't start at all...

The F-35 uses 270v DC power. This power supply is more advanced and different in almost every way from 400 Hz power we are used to.

Like 28v DC, it is more difficult to have long cable runs from the power supply to the aircraft. In other words, central 270v DC systems or putting this power supply far away from the aircraft is not possible.

The F-35 is also a very smart aircraft. If the quality of the 270v DC provided from the converter, or the 28v DC E&F safety power circuit is not the perfect voltage, amperage or harmonics at the aircraft plug, the aircraft will not accept the power and will not turn on when the ground crew hits the external power switch. Nobody likes it when that happens.

Due to required, shortened 270v DC cable lengths, the power converter will most often be located in the hangar.

However, if the hangar will also service legacy aircraft, space may not be available to fit the converters along the hangar wall. Solutions have ranged from raised platforms, hangar ceiling mounts and high wall-mounting solutions. Many specialized designers have had to change the way they think if they have done 400 Hz hangers in the past and now are designing for 270v DC power.

Which apparently is a huge bonus according to the writer.

But I am still fascinated by the whole air system so lets move back to that.

With the F-35’s multiple, complex on-board electronic systems, the PCA requirements are very difficult to provide for the F-35. Not too hot … not too cold … it has to be very dry air and at a higher pressure than normal commercial PCA requirements.
This balancing act would be hard enough with aircraft mobile units, but these modern hangars have to have underground trunk-line systems with the actual units outside the hanger.
B GSE Group and JBT were challenged a few years ago to come up with the first fully compliant F-35 unit called a HPC-F (High Pressure Air-Conditioner-Fixed). This is an amazing unit.
A trunk line system means that several HPC-F units are ducted into a common hard underground pipe and then divided off to each PIT location. There can be more PITs than air units so the logic to make sure every PIT has the right requirements of air with the common trunk line and multiple distances to each PIT can only be done with refined logic.
With a push of a button on the EZ access PIT remote, the operation of the PCA unit, the motorized butterfly valves and the preprogrammed fast cool down sequence is all started up. This is truly one of the most automated aircraft service PCA systems in the world.

So what do you think. Is it just the marketing team that is really not very good at it's job or will the F-35 be best placed on the wrong side of an ocean in case of a war?

Because it really doesn't sound like it would do well here:

[Stavroforos]

All these high-tech fighters that require so much constant support and maintenance are going to be useless so quickly if we have a major war again. I guess we better keep all those F-15s, F-16s in reserve because they're going to end up fighting most of the war.

[paleologos]

Are we sure this article is not just being sarcastic?
Because it sounds as if they are trying to sell the plane to this guy:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[I WUB PUGS]

Luckily for us the production run is scheduled to be endless. So that means we get to keep rolling the dice on getting a sensible Congress and Administration that doesn't think subsidizing the GDP of Texas for the production of a plane is sustainable. In short, its gonna be another F-22. Shortened production run that will be a fraction of what it originally called for. And it will probably see limited action... but with much fanfare like the F-22 over Iraq/Syria.

So yay! Probably only got about 5-10 more years of pissing money away before someone pulls the plug. Better than 20 years I suppose.

[Pavlik the Rus]

This part sounds weird to me

The F-35 uses 270v DC power. This power supply is more advanced and different in almost every way from 400 Hz power we are used to.

Like 28v DC, it is more difficult to have long cable runs from the power supply to the aircraft. In other words, central 270v DC systems or putting this power supply far away from the aircraft is not possible.

The F-35 is also a very smart aircraft. If the quality of the 270v DC provided from the converter, or the 28v DC E&F safety power circuit is not the perfect voltage, amperage or harmonics at the aircraft plug, the aircraft will not accept the power and will not turn on when the ground crew hits the external power switch. Nobody likes it when that happens.

Due to required, shortened 270v DC cable lengths, the power converter will most often be located in the hangar.

However, if the hangar will also service legacy aircraft, space may not be available to fit the converters along the hangar wall. Solutions have ranged from raised platforms, hangar ceiling mounts and high wall-mounting solutions. Many specialized designers have had to change the way they think if they have done 400 Hz hangers in the past and now are designing for 270v DC power.

A lot of strange words.
Why 270 V DC is more advanced then 400 Hz AC?
Like 28v DC, it is more difficult to have long cable runs from the power supply to the aircraft. In other words, central 270v DC systems or putting this power supply far away from the aircraft is not possible. - it is not true.
And so on.

[I WUB PUGS]

The writer is a hack.

[paleologos]

The writer is a hack.

He is not a hack, he is just a salesman (Bryan Bullerdick, V.P. Sales & Marketing, FCX Systems, Inc.).
Follow the link provided in the OP to view the original article and from there open the link to the author's name to view what other articles he has contributed.
He merely says that the F-35 needs what he is selling: centraly provided pre-conditioned air and a power source.
The part of another article of his that brought a smile to my face:

The idea that POU can be a catch-all design for all sizes and types of projects stems from outdated information on technologies, concern with capital limitations, or general misunderstandings of central system designs.

Here is a salesman who has sniffed out a spending spree, or so he thinks.

[I WUB PUGS]

Well it is low-quality writing with little substance.... like a hack would write.

[Gaidin]

A lot of strange words.
Why 270 V DC is more advanced then 400 Hz AC?
Like 28v DC, it is more difficult to have long cable runs from the power supply to the aircraft. In other words, central 270v DC systems or putting this power supply far away from the aircraft is not possible. - it is not true.
And so on.

It's not more advanced. It's just hideously different. And a pure stream of power instead of a wave. 270 volts of it. Not 28 volts. 270 volts. The kind of hardware you need to run that steadily into a system that can apparently tell a bad signal is what's more advanced in that sense of the word.

You see that picture up there of a plane that ran on a messed up island? That's why the military liked the 400 Hz wave. God knows why they're doing this.

[Dante Von Hespburg]

I question the export capability of this in the context- While the US may be able to afford to put all this kind of stuff in place (Unnecessarily so i might add, and well...it's full of drawbacks). But a serious question- how the heck is someone like the UK going to do this with ours? We're supposedly purchasing a lot... i guess we have the Euro-fighter at least. But yeah. I just don't see how other NATO members and 'F-35' partners are going to realistically run these craft. Just an uneducated view of course.

[Simon Cashmere]

So you can destroy the squadron in the hanger by targeting the airconditioner?

[Gaidin]

I question the export capability of this in the context- While the US may be able to afford to put all this kind of stuff in place (Unnecessarily so i might add, and well...it's full of drawbacks). But a serious question- how the heck is someone like the UK going to do this with ours? We're supposedly purchasing a lot... i guess we have the Euro-fighter at least. But yeah. I just don't see how other NATO members and 'F-35' partners are going to realistically run these craft. Just an uneducated view of course.

You're thinking wrong. The F-35 is a very complex system given the generation of fighter it is with the capabilities it has. Or is supposed to have. For all we know certain partners may only be interested in a capability and not even for a fighter jet, and may have said "sure, we'll pony up" and pitched in. Now, larger partners like Britain may actually want the jet itself, but meh, that's a bigger buy-in true. As far as doing this, that's more a matter of the appropriate environmental and civil engineering to the location. If Britain hasn't figured that out in the past 50 years as technology has become available for use I'm not sure if anybody else ever will.

So you can destroy the squadron in the hanger by targeting the airconditioner?

Not destroy so much as render it unusable, likely. Scale your thinking appropriately. Especially when they have safeguards like the power intake shutting down if something's wrong with a 270DC volt line even slightly. To destroy the squadron you probably have to target the hangar as a whole.


None of this is to say the F-35 is worthwhile. But when we say it's crap let's at least say it's the right kind of crap.

[Enros]

It's not more advanced. It's just hideously different. And a pure stream of power instead of a wave. 270 volts of it. Not 28 volts. 270 volts. The kind of hardware you need to run that steadily into a system that can apparently tell a bad signal is what's more advanced in that sense of the word.

You see that picture up there of a plane that ran on a messed up island? That's why the military liked the 400 Hz wave. God knows why they're doing this.

The electrical systems of the aircraft are doing a lot of things that used to be done by hydraulics and hard mechanical linkages. That means they need more power. Increasing the voltage from 115 V to 270 V certainly makes sense. The switch from AC to DC is presumably because computers run on DC. In older planes every computer needed its own device to convert AC to DC, which adds weight.

I'm not sure that this is any more demanding on hangars than the previous power supply they were using. You need a similar converter in both cases. Both can be fed from portable diesel generators, batteries and fuel cells.

The article says "like 28v DC, it is more difficult to have long cable runs from the power supply to the aircraft. In other words, central 270v DC systems or putting this power supply far away from the aircraft is not possible.". I'm not sure why that is. The system that converts electricity from the grid into 270 V DC is easily portable by one person. I see portable power converts on construction sites all the time for people to plug their power tools into.

[Gaidin]

The electrical systems of the aircraft are doing a lot of things that used to be done by hydraulics and hard mechanical linkages. That means they need more power. Increasing the voltage from 115 V to 270 V certainly makes sense. The switch from AC to DC is presumably because computers run on DC. In older planes every computer needed its own device to convert AC to DC, which adds weight.

I'm not sure that this is any more demanding on hangars than the previous power supply they were using. You need a similar converter in both cases. Both can be fed from portable diesel generators, batteries and fuel cells.

I'm not impressed when those systems run without the cord. They now have a system they're trying to power up with an accident waiting to happen at 270V DC. In what will inevitably have to be an enclosed space if they have a hope to control the environment the way it needs to be controlled. Increasing the voltage from 115V to 270V is, well, total and utter crap and is just an added requirement passed back to have a checkmark put next to it by the military based on the demands given to the designers by the military.

[Dante Von Hespburg]

You're thinking wrong. The F-35 is a very complex system given the generation of fighter it is with the capabilities it has. Or is supposed to have. For all we know certain partners may only be interested in a capability and not even for a fighter jet, and may have said "sure, we'll pony up" and pitched in. Now, larger partners like Britain may actually want the jet itself, but meh, that's a bigger buy-in true. As far as doing this, that's more a matter of the appropriate environmental and civil engineering to the location. If Britain hasn't figured that out in the past 50 years as technology has become available for use I'm not sure if anybody else ever will.


Not destroy so much as render it unusable, likely. Scale your thinking appropriately. Especially when they have safeguards like the power intake shutting down if something's wrong with a 270DC volt line even slightly. To destroy the squadron you probably have to target the hangar as a whole.

I stand corrected here, cheers Gaidin. So in essence for the former part- it's if anything an interesting and perhaps long termed (Though naturally incredibly expensive) research test exercise looking at the new technologies and capabilities on the plane itself for many. Indeed perhaps for the UK and US it's worth producing a limited run (I've seen it's potential combat and strategic deficiencies well highlighted and argued here, so i'd question as you said it being anything more than 'crap' for all intents and purposes as the main poster-boy for an air-force) as a testing platform?

Agreed that i'm sure the UK will be able to accommodate. I'm wondering more in terms of what we'd like it to be used for- I'm assuming this was already taken into account when the new Carriers were built (Again though my ignorance of the details of such matters are showing, i could be off the mark), i was always under the impression this was meant to be a kind of front-line rough and ready plane from the UK angle as our main source of power projection- so theoretically could end up in a wide variety of places around the globe in line with UK commitments (The silly islands we keep in strange places for one that have lost their economic and strategic value as global commerce advanced), i'm just not sure the UK has the kind of money to throw in the extra support considerations- especially as i'm pretty sure this will affect the analysis of 'It will only cost a bit more than a Euro-fighter to maintain logistically'. Would this have much impact on that? Also to it's nature as supposedly a readily deploy able type all-purpose plane for the UK. Though i get the feeling things may have moved on from that vision now looking at some of the more recent articles and it seems relegated to being on par with the Eurofighter's and to replace the Tornadoes.

[Enros]

I'm not impressed when those systems run without the cord. They now have a system they're trying to power up with an accident waiting to happen at 270V DC. In what will inevitably have to be an enclosed space if they have a hope to control the environment the way it needs to be controlled.

So you're claiming ground crew working in an enclosed space with a box whose job is to convert AC to DC is dangerous? But they are already expected to work in an enclosed space next to a box who job it is to convert one kind of AC to a different kind of AC.

Increasing the voltage from 115V to 270V is, well, total and utter crap and is just an added requirement passed back to have a checkmark put next to it by the military based on the demands given to the designers by the military.

The alternative is to increase the current. That's means all of the components would have to be bigger. It also means you're more likely to die of electrocution.

[Gaidin]

I stand corrected here, cheers Gaidin. So in essence for the former part- it's if anything an interesting and perhaps long termed (Though naturally incredibly expensive) research test exercise looking at the new technologies and capabilities on the plane itself for many. Indeed perhaps for the UK and US it's worth producing a limited run (I've seen it's potential combat and strategic deficiencies well highlighted and argued here, so i'd question as you said it being anything more than 'crap' for all intents and purposes as the main poster-boy for an air-force) as a testing platform?

Agreed that i'm sure the UK will be able to accommodate. I'm wondering more in terms of what we'd like it to be used for- I'm assuming this was already taken into account when the new Carriers were built (Again though my ignorance of the details of such matters are showing, i could be off the mark), i was always under the impression this was meant to be a kind of front-line rough and ready plane from the UK angle as our main source of power projection- so theoretically could end up in a wide variety of places around the globe in line with UK commitments (The silly islands we keep in strange places for one that have lost their economic and strategic value as global commerce advanced), i'm just not sure the UK has the kind of money to throw in the extra support considerations- especially as i'm pretty sure this will affect the analysis of 'It will only cost a bit more than a Euro-fighter to maintain logistically'. Would this have much impact on that? Also to it's nature as supposedly a readily deploy able type all-purpose plane for the UK. Though i get the feeling things may have moved on from that vision now looking at some of the more recent articles and it seems relegated to being on par with the Eurofighter's and to replace the Tornadoes.

I wouldn't take a stab myself at what Britain would have the willingness to do with their carriers to maintain this piece of expensiveness in what I'll just call the field. It'd be easier to just have a base where they can have a base. Let's just put it that way.

So you're claiming ground crew working in an enclosed space with a box whose job is to convert AC to DC is dangerous? But they are already expected to work in an enclosed space next to a box who job it is to convert one kind of AC to a different kind of AC.

The box not so much. The box is fine. It's all the lines. You want these people to work in an enclosed space with a high-power high-tech high-voltage DC line that needs to compete with the jet you need to be ready for an accident at some point. And an accident at that level involves someone or something melting. According to the hilarious article the jet is the smart one, not the power line.

The alternative is to increase the current. That's means all of the components would have to be bigger. It also means you're more likely to die of electrocution.

...Yea. You see if that makes a difference for you with that kind of potential riding down your ass at a constant level. See, it's not the systems. It's the battery. The other jets that use what I can describe as a motor system, or at least for similar systems a lesser battery, you do the DC conversion elsewhere.

[Enros]

The box not so much. The box is fine. It's all the lines. You want these people to work in an enclosed space with a high-power high-tech high-voltage DC line that needs to compete with the jet you need to be ready for an accident at some point. And an accident at that level involves someone or something melting. According to the hilarious article the jet is the smart one, not the power line.

I've seen very complicated factories and construction sites with up to 1000 V DC lines running about the place for years with no accidents. If you do your health and safety properly, it should be fine.

...Yea. You see if that makes a difference for you with that kind of potential riding down your ass at a constant level. See, it's not the systems. It's the battery. The other jets that use what I can describe as a motor system, or at least for similar systems a lesser battery, you do the DC conversion elsewhere.

Well, there's already plenty on board that can explode!

[Gaidin]

I've seen very complicated factories and construction sites with up to 1000 V DC lines running about the place for years with no accidents. If you do your health and safety properly, it should be fine.

I trust the military less.

[IZob]

Its common that a manufacture will claim its hardware should be only used with x, in places y in situations z at times 123. The reality is, hardware is much more rugged and can survive the punishment. The Military always adapts.