F-35 HMD Helmet revealed...

Atlas · Post by **Atlas** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 3:06 pm

I was browsing around the fighter ops fourms and ran across a thread about the F-35 HMD. Thought I would share the article and picture with everyone.

The Article and Picture.

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/20 ... ealed.html

Rage · Post by **Rage** » Wed Apr 18, 2007 11:05 pm

Whoa. A virtual HUD? Good stuff. now you can check six, and even turn to engage while having the HUD right in your face. very nice.

Rhino · Post by **Rhino** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 2:38 am

"I AM DARK HELMET!!"

Rage · Post by **Rage** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 9:19 am

Post by **Lawndart** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 9:39 am

Lord Helmet!

LOL!

Burner · Post by **Burner** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 11:41 am

That's the coolest thing I've seen in years- but aren't they like $100k a piece?

Post by **Lawndart** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 1:09 pm

Unit cost per F-35 (estimated '04):

U.S. Air Force version (CTOL) ~ $28M
U.S. Marine version (STOVL) ~ $35M
U.S. Navy version (CV) ~ $38M

Considering the helmet is an integral part of the aircraft system, even if they cost $100K a pop, that's less than half a percent of the cost of the F-35 at that rate.

The F-35 may cost $73M million per aircraft, based more recent development cost forecasts, more than double the estimates given originally to US allies planning to buy it.

Here's a related story: http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,1 ... 05,00.html

Regardless, of the final price tag, even with the lowest estimate of $28M per aircraft for the Air Force (Convetional Takeoff and Landing - CTOL version) the helmet cost almost dissapears in those big numbers! The helmet could cost almost twice as much as you said Burner and it would still only be roughly half a percent of the unit price!

Note: Sources for estimates are not fact nor final and from various internet sites.

Rhino · Post by **Rhino** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 2:22 pm

So when can we see one in Gunner's possesion?

Post by **Gunner** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 5:31 pm

Rhino wrote:So when can we see one in Gunner's possesion?

I'll have you know it's already on order...you did mean the Dark Helmet version didn't you?

STRIKER · Post by **STRIKER** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 6:05 pm

Well LD and I can atest to the fact the helmet works fine for ludicrous speed to full stop. I know it has saved my life more than once!

Rage · Post by **Rage** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:29 pm

Lawndart wrote:Unit cost per F-35 (estimated '04):

U.S. Air Force version (CTOL) ~ $28M
U.S. Marine version (STOVL) ~ $35M
U.S. Navy version (CV) ~ $38M

Considering the helmet is an integral part of the aircraft system, even if they cost $100K a pop, that's less than half a percent of the cost of the F-35 at that rate.

The F-35 may cost $73M million per aircraft, based more recent development cost forecasts, more than double the estimates given originally to US allies planning to buy it.

Here's a related story: http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,1 ... 05,00.html

Regardless, of the final price tag, even with the lowest estimate of $28M per aircraft for the Air Force (Convetional Takeoff and Landing - CTOL version) the helmet cost almost dissapears in those big numbers! The helmet could cost almost twice as much as you said Burner and it would still only be roughly half a percent of the unit price!

Note: Sources for estimates are not fact nor final and from various internet sites.

makes the helmet sound insignificant. cost wise anyway. the JSF is going to be a hell of a plane...still think the F22 is sexier though

Ells · Post by **Ells** » Fri Apr 20, 2007 8:26 am

Very cool but must weigh a bit and give you a stiff neck after a while?

Burner · Post by **Burner** » Fri Apr 20, 2007 10:34 am

Ells wrote:Very cool but must weigh a bit and give you a stiff neck after a while?

Doubtful, the only thing that can make a high-tech piece of equipment more expensive than encrusting it with diamonds is to try to make it light weight. Like an F1 car this helmet is made of carbon fiber and no doubt is as expensive as a small home. The engineers probably had three design guidelines when making the dark helmet- good head tracking, safe highspeed ejection, and lightweight. Each one of those design guidelines being more expensive than the previous.

On a more fundamental level engineers can do, at best, two of three things when in the design process. Never more than two and some can only do one. Cheaper, better, faster. In this case the taxpayers would expect that they're doing it better and faster and price be damned but they're still pretty slow in the development process so really they're just doing it better and taking more time and alot more money.

This same trend can be seen by LDs post showing that the original estimate of $38M may be off by upwards of $35M! and the project is still late. This all can be traced back to the biased awarding of the JSF contract to Lockheed-Martin over Boeing not on the basis of merit, (as Boeing's proposal beat LM) but in hopes of saving the failing company from bankrupcy. Now the government has got exactly what they paid for; a failing company that continues to fail even when leaching off the federal teet- big surprise. How any design team, of any size or scope, can be off budget by 200% and still late on delivery is beyond me.

Ok Rant Over

Ells · Post by **Ells** » Tue Apr 24, 2007 8:57 am

Ah I see, thanks for the insight Burner.

I have to say though I do prefer the Lockheed version better than the Boeing entry, what was up with that air intake on the nose??