Page 46 - Lessons-Learned-at-Pax-River_Neat

Answer: Very. We talk and work together every day. A lot of times, people want to draw
a distinction between Pax and Edwards, and that is really not applicable to this pro-
gram. What is unique about the F-35 program really is the scope and scale of what we
are doing.

It is not only different from what we have done before, but frankly there are some very
real-world throughput issues. By having both Pax and Edwards integrated, we can ex-
pand the test space.

Let me give you an example. The data generated and communicated by the F-35 is un-
precedented. This means that from a testing point of view we run up against telemetry
limits. What we can use in DoD-related telemetry from the planes in flight is really
pushed into a very tight box. We are limited to four or five airplanes at a time as the
max that we can operate for the kind of bandwidth we are pulling off of F-35s at any
given time.

The test data from what we call the orange instrumentation on the plane — specialized
flight test instrumentation like pressure transducers and load strain gauges and things
like that — are part of the significant bandwidth we transmit. And, when combined
with bus data, it is indeed a very large bandwidth compared to our legacy programs.

Question: Developmental testing is not a one-off to get the planes out the door until
the next model series arrives. What is the role of developmental testing in the life cy-
cle of a combat airplane?

Answer: Put simply, developmental testing is for the life cycle of the airplane. People
would be surprised, if they do not follow the business, at how much developmental
flight-testing goes on today on the F/A-18. There are continuous needs generated by
new weapons, or communication requirements, especially with the F-35 coming to the
fleet.

With the F-35, clearly this type of developmental testing is for the life cycle. There is no
reason to expect otherwise.

Second Line of Defense Lessons Learned at Pax River
! 4! 5