Key tests for latest F-35s will begin in 2026, two years after rollout
An important series of tests for the latest upgrades to the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter will likely not begin until two years after these jets started hitting the field — and at least three years following their original due date.
The Office of the Director, Operational Test and Evaluation said in its annual report, submitted to Congress on Jan. 31, that dedicated operational tests for the F-35's Technology Refresh 3, or TR-3, upgrades will probably start in mid to late fiscal 2026, or around next summer. Those tests are intended to determine whether TR-3 is operationally effective.
Lt. Gen. Michael Schmidt, the military's F-35 program executive officer, said in a statement to Defense News that as of January, Lockheed Martin has delivered more than 100 TR-3 equipped fighters. All of those jets have software allowing its pilots to conduct training flights, including combat training.
'We are aggressively implementing comprehensive test plans to ensure this critical upgrade delivers cutting-edge capabilities to the warfighter,' Schmidt said. 'The F-35 [Joint Program Office] remains focused on working through known risks to deliver TR-3 combat capability in 2025. The capability will continue to be improved in future lots to ensure warfighters have what they need to win in future conflicts.'
An official with knowledge of the operational test program for the F-35, who spoke about the program on the condition of anonymity, said that starting operational testing next year would not delay the fielding of the newest jets.
'It is not uncommon for fielding decisions to come before operational testing is complete,' the official said.
The Office of the Director, Operational Test and Evaluation said the TR-3 tests can't begin until its software is stable and aircraft modifications, flight test instruments and open-air battle shaping capabilities are in place. But if those systems and software are matured and in place sooner than expected, testing could start earlier, the office said.
Pentagon to accept deliveries of Lockheed F-35s after yearlong pause
The delayed launch of the TR-3 tests is the latest in a series of setbacks for the Lockheed Martin-made fighter, which have caused efforts to modernize the program to slip further behind.
TR-3 is a set of improvements to the F-35′s hardware and software, which include better displays, computer memory and processing power. TR-3 was originally set to be released in April 2023, but software problems and integration difficulties stalled the program.
The Pentagon refused to accept deliveries of the newest F-35s until July 2024, when an interim version of the TR-3 software that allows the jets to conduct training flights was completed.
But the TR-3-enabled F-35s can't yet carry out combat missions. And while the F-35 Joint Program Office still hopes to have the jets combat ready in 2025, the timeline might slip further. In a January earnings call, Lockheed Chief Financial Officer Jay Malave said the work might not be finished until early 2026.
The delays in TR-3 are also having cascading effects on subsequent improvements to the F-35 – particularly another modernization program called Block 4 – which is intended to allow the jet to carry more weapons, better recognize targets and improve its electronic warfare capabilities.
The Office of the Director, Operational Test and Evaluation criticized the F-35 program's lack of progress in rolling out necessary software.
'The F-35 program has shown no improvement in meeting schedule and performance timelines for developing and testing software designed to address deficiencies and add new capabilities,' the office's annual report said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Miami Herald
33 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
Trump's new office of ‘Western values' will be a showcase of double standards
The Trump administration's plan to create a State Department office of 'Democracy and Western values' sounds like a great idea — on paper. But given the administration's recent actions abroad and at home, this new bureau is likely to have less than zero credibility. According to a 130-page report to Congress by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, the proposed office is part of a State Department overhaul that aims to cut 3,448 jobs. The shake-up would scrap most of the existing Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, merging its remnants into a smaller office led by a deputy assistant secretary of state for democracy and Western values. But based on the Trump administration's track record, this new department is shaping up to be a textbook case of political double standards. Expect plenty of finger-wagging at Cuba, Venezuela and Iran — which is fine and necessary — while turning a blind eye to the destruction of democratic institutions in Mexico, El Salvador or Hungary. What's worse, it may echo Trump's praise for some Trump-friendly dictatorships, such as Saudi Arabia, or near-dictatorships like El Salvador. During his visit to Saudi Arabia in March, Trump praised its de facto ruler, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, as an 'incredible' and 'great' leader. The U.S. Office of the Director of National Intelligence said in 2021 that bin Salman had approved the operation that killed Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi. In recent months, Trump has also rolled out the red carpet for El Salvador's authoritarian president, Nayib Bukele, describing him as a 'remarkable president' and showering him with praise at the White House. While Bukele is popular for slashing El Salvador's crime rates, human rights groups — and, until Trump took office Jan. 20, even the U.S. government — have accused him of widespread abuses and bending the law to seize absolute power. Recently, Bukele passed a law cracking down on human rights, pro-democracy and anti-corruption groups that receive foreign funding. His government has also stepped up arrests of critics. As a headline in The Economist magazine put it this week, 'First he busted gangs. Now Nayib Bukele busts critics.' The Trump administration has also been shy about criticizing Mexico's slow-motion slide into an elected autocracy. On June 1, Mexico held controversial elections to elect judges and Supreme Court justices by direct vote — a far cry from the merit-based appointment system used in most countries. Critics fear — rightly — that the ruling Morena party rigged the voting process to seize the judiciary and give the President Claudia Sheinbaum control over all branches of government. Only 13% of Mexican voters went to the polls. Furthermore, the Trump administration is slashing U.S. aid for human rights and press freedom groups worldwide, including independent pro-democracy websites in Venezuela and Cuba. At home, the administration has little to show when it comes to its defense of 'Western values.' Is it consistent with 'Western values' to try to deport hundreds of thousands of Venezuelans, Cubans, Nicaraguans and Haitians who are legally in the United States under Temporary Protected Status (TPS), often separating them from their U.S.-born children? Is the United States really upholding 'Western values' when its president ignores court rulings, as has happened recently in several immigration cases? Can America really preach about 'Western values' when its president said that there were 'very fine people on both sides' after a group of neo-Nazis clashed with protesters at the infamous 'Unite the Right' rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, in 2017? Unless the Trump administration stops praising autocrats and shows respect for America's own constitution, the new 'Democracy and Western Values' office will quickly become a joke. Don't be surprised if it's soon dubbed the Office of Selective Outrage. Its acronym, OSO, means 'bear' in Spanish, which would be fitting for an office that hibernates whenever democracy is under threat. Don't miss the 'Oppenheimer Presenta' TV show on Sundays at 9 pm E.T. on CNN en Español. Blog:
Forbes
38 minutes ago
- Forbes
Here Are The Republicans Changing Their Minds About Trump's Policy Bill
Some Republicans said they were unaware of certain provisions in the massive Trump policy bill that passed the House last month and threatened to vote against it when it returns to the lower chamber after revisions in the Senate, throwing its future into doubt. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., speaks to reporters as she arrives for a closed-door meeting ... More with House Republicans, at the Republican National Committee office on Capitol Hill on March 25, 2025, in Washington, DC. (Photo by DREW ANGERER/AFP via Getty Images) Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., said Tuesday she wouldn't have voted for the bill if she knew a provision to block states from regulating artificial intelligence for the next 10 years was included, writing on X that she is 'adamantly OPPOSED' to the measure, calling it 'a violation of state rights.' Greene said she won't vote for the legislation again if the Senate doesn't remove the moratorium, though proponents of the provision, such as Rep. Jay Obernolte, R-Calif., have said it's designed to motivate Congress to adopt national artificial intelligence regulation, arguing a patchwork of state rules complicates development, according to The Intercept. Rep. Mike Flood, R-Neb., also said during a town hall meeting in his district last week he wouldn't have voted for the bill if he knew it included a provision that would make it more burdensome for federal judges to hold people in contempt. 'I'm not going to hide the truth, this provision was unknown to me when I voted for that bill,' Flood said. The provision would require judges to set bonds for parties in federal civil suits seeking a preliminary injunction or temporary restraining order to cover any costs that might be incurred if the injunction or restraining order were overturned. Advocates of the provision claim it's designed to prevent frivolous lawsuits, while opponents allege it's designed to protect Trump and his allies if they violate court orders, according to The New York Times. Elon Musk has strongly come out against the bill in recent days. He ripped the legislation in a series of more than a dozen X posts this week, calling it a 'massive, outrageous, pork-filled . . . disgusting abomination.' He also appeared to threaten Republicans who voted for it, suggesting voters would remove them from office in next year's midterms. Congress has set a goal to have what's formally known as the 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act' on President Donald Trump's desk by July 4, though it's expected to undergo significant changes in the upper chamber and be sent back to the House before Trump signs it. Multiple Republican senators, including Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., have said it adds too much to the federal deficit, while others, such as Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., have expressed concerns about cuts to Medicaid. Assuming all Democrats vote against the bill, Republicans can afford to lose no more than three votes to pass the bill. The House approved the legislation in a 215-214 vote on May 22, with only two Republicans, Reps. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., and Warren Davidson, R-Ohio, voting against the bill, while three others voted 'present.' Trump personally lobbied Republican holdouts to approve the bill, and House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., spearheaded several last-minute changes, including raising the State and Local Tax (SALT) deduction rate and moving up the deadline for Medicaid work requirements. The legislation would also deliver on some of Trump's campaign promises, including ending taxes on tips and overtime, extending his 2017 tax cuts and additional funding for border security. Trump's Signature Policy Agenda Passes House After Last-Minute Revisions Including SALT Cap Increase (Forbes) 'Disgusting Abomination': Musk Turns On Trump—Rips Policy Bill In New Angry Rant (Forbes) Here's Where Medicaid Cuts Stand In Trump's Mega-Bill—Affecting More Than 7 Million Americans (Forbes)
TechCrunch
43 minutes ago
- TechCrunch
Elon Musk's introduction to politics
Elon Musk spent the last several months knee deep in government, sidelining his companies to pursue a longstanding Republican quest to weed out alleged waste and fraud. Then, a few weeks ago, House Republicans passed a bill with provisions that would kneecap Tesla. Now, Musk is fuming that the bill is 'a disgusting abomination.' Plenty has been written about Musk's motivations for cozying up to President Donald Trump; for spending 130 days as a special government employee; for spending time away from Tesla, the main source of his wealth. Whatever his reasons, Musk did come away with some wins: He managed to secure some free advertising for Tesla, and Starlink is slowly embedding itself into the federal government. But his time roaming the halls of power and standing alongside the president haven't exempted Tesla from Republicans' desire to sink clean energy and electric vehicles. On Tuesday, Musk let loose. 'I'm sorry, but I just can't stand it anymore,' he wrote on X. 'This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination. 'Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it.' Techcrunch event Save now through June 4 for TechCrunch Sessions: AI Save $300 on your ticket to TC Sessions: AI—and get 50% off a second. Hear from leaders at OpenAI, Anthropic, Khosla Ventures, and more during a full day of expert insights, hands-on workshops, and high-impact networking. These low-rate deals disappear when the doors open on June 5. Exhibit at TechCrunch Sessions: AI Secure your spot at TC Sessions: AI and show 1,200+ decision-makers what you've built — without the big spend. Available through May 9 or while tables last. Berkeley, CA | REGISTER NOW I'm sorry, but I just can't stand it anymore. This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination. Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it. — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 3, 2025 The Congressional Budget Office has yet to score the bill and its impact on the deficit, but this week the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a nonprofit organization, estimated that the legislation would add $3 trillion in debt. Musk might be publicly denouncing the reconciliation bill for its inability to rein in federal deficits — there's no reason to think he doesn't believe its a problem — but it's hard to imagine he doesn't feel personally slighted by the legislation. An Axios report backs up that take on the situation, saying that Musk was 'frustrated at failing to win favorable treatment in the bill and the administration at large.' 'Elon was butthurt,' a source with knowledge of Musk's feelings told Axios. It's not just Musk's feelings that could be bruised: His fortune could be dented if provisions hostile to Tesla survive the Senate. Tesla's biggest hit would come from revisions to the EV tax credit. Today, consumers who buy an eligible EV can claim up to $7,500, a provision that runs through 2032. Republicans want to end it in 2026 and reinstate the per-manufacturer cap of 200,000 vehicles. The cap almost feels targeted at Tesla, since the automaker was among the first to exceed that figure. But Republicans didn't stop there. They also took a hammer to clean energy, severely constraining the ability of rooftop solar installations to qualify for 30% tax credits. If passed, the changes would undercut Tesla's energy division, which recently has grown 67% year-over-year. The business line has already been threatened by Trump's tariffs, which 'will have a relatively larger impact on our energy generation and storage business compared to our automotive business,' Tesla said in its quarterly report. In a parting shot, the White House announced Saturday, the day after Musk's departure, that it was pulling Jared Isaacman's nomination to be NASA administrator, something Musk had championed. Welcome to politics, Elon.
