The F-35 Joint Program Office (JPO) is actively addressing corrosion challenges within the F-35 fleet, focusing on maintaining the aircraft’s long-term mission capability and operational reliability, according to a statement from the F-35 Joint Program Office Public Affairs.
One of the most visible issues is the discoloration of the aircraft’s surface, which can be observed after deployments, particularly in harsh environments. The JPO clarified that this discoloration does not indicate structural damage or reduced stealth capability.
The statement notes, “Much of what the public sees as damage, such as the discoloration on jets returning from deployment, does not represent a degraded aircraft.”
During shipboard operations, F-35s are often subjected to a range of environmental stressors, including “frequent exposure to sea water, contamination from grease, oil, and other fluids, as well as close proximity to jet blast and rotor wash.” These conditions can cause the aircraft’s coatings to appear worn or discoloured, but the JPO stressed that the underlying integrity remains intact. “While it may look severe, these marks do not indicate a loss of coating integrity nor stealth performance,” the office stated.
To combat these challenges, the JPO has developed a new coating for the F-35, aimed at “significantly reduc[ing] or eliminat[ing] discoloration, enhance[ing] durability, and extend[ing] the coating’s service life.” This coating will be introduced to fielded aircraft as part of routine maintenance, “similar to how coatings are restored on commercial and military jets.” The JPO described the initiative as part of a broader effort to support the F-35 program’s “long-term, adaptive sustainability strategy.”
The underlying cause of corrosion is not always visible. As the JPO explained, “Corrosion doesn’t come with flashing alarms or immediate system failures—it works quietly and gradually, often concealed beneath coatings or hidden within seams, joints, and fasteners.” The complex airframe, made from a blend of aluminium, titanium, and carbon composites, faces risks of galvanic corrosion, especially when dissimilar metals interact in humid, salty environments.
The JPO has made corrosion control a priority, implementing a coordinated strategy to minimise risks across the fleet. Initially, the program lacked a comprehensive framework, leaving maintenance teams “playing ‘catch-up’ as the fleet matured.” However, recent improvements include a more structured approach, supported by a growing team of engineers and technical experts. The aim is to ensure that “every jet [is] up to standard and [has] an improved supply chain of consumables, ensuring long-term readiness and mission capability.”
The office also highlighted the often-overlooked nature of corrosion management. “The F-35 JPO’s battle with corrosion improvement and management is not dramatic. It does not make headlines like a successful sortie or a new weapons integration. But it is vital. It is ongoing. And it is being won thanks to the dedication of maintainers, depot teams, and engineers who are working tirelessly to protect the world’s most advanced fighter aircraft.”
Through these persistent efforts, the F-35 Joint Program Office aims to keep the fleet “not just capable, but reliable, ready to dominate the skies for decades to come.”
Oh, how long they been in service and only now its address the issue, the USA hides things, restricts things as when it suits them. And its all about control and adding more cost.
“ The complex airframe, made from a blend of aluminium, titanium, and carbon composites, faces risks of galvanic corrosion, especially when dissimilar metals interact in humid, salty environments”
Hmme well all of this is know and done science. All you need is a table of redux potentials and you know what doesn’t mix.
This should never have happened.
One of the reasons why *non conductive* composites are useful to break a galvanic bridge. Carbon composites are not so useful as carbon is a conductor…..
No surprise, this is the cost of doing business with 5th gen aircraft.
The US Marines have already outlined staffing increases to deal with this (in addition to growling squadron strength from 10 to 12 during the F-35 transition) in their Aviation Plan 2025, which was released in January:
“To support the future increase to 12 PAA per squadron, each squadron will undergo a manpower re-alignment
that seeks to fill gaps in certain military occupational specialties (MOS) within the maintenance department.
Squadron structure will increase by two pilots and 25 Marines in the maintenance department with a
heavy focus on corrosion control. Our primary focus is maintaining manpower to support the Tactical Aviation
transition plan. Once the transition plan is complete, this additional structure will be laid in as squadron PAA
grows from 10 to 12.”
Would have thought this had been considered and sorted pretty much during the design stage!
A major fail that it wasn’t properly dealt with at the earliest stages. This smacks of ‘adding system security’ to already developed software! It is about as logical a way of dealing with it. You might as well say lets see which bits actually corrode and we will deal with that dynamically…..or how does a hacker get in….lets patch that!
All you need to do is list which bits touch which other bits and then have table of redux potentials for each bit. You can then have a heat map of where the issues [largest delta redux] are which you can then fix [change materials] or mitigate using insulating pastes and/or passivating areas or whole surfaces.
Other things are designed like this…..yes , really!
“F 35B out of service date 2069”
Better check the warranty Ms Eagles.
It’ll be the iron content in the stealth coating. As I understand it it’s essentially a mix of iron and carbon.
To be fair, some of the issues is inherent, due to the construction of the radar absorbent material (RAM). A lot of RAM still contain iron particles, which when energised by radio waves heat up, thereby “absorbing” the radio wave. Unfortunately having iron particles in the RAM, does mean its more susceptible to oxidization (rusting).
An often overlooked issue with “rusting” is electrical connectors. Where the designer has either spec’d the wrong material, or the supplier has delivered the wrong type. The ubiquitous MIL-STD-38999 connectors have this issue. Where they can come in aluminium, stainless steel or composite construction, complete with cadmium or nickel plating. The aluminium connectors with the cadmium coating in a maritime climate are terrible. Not only does the aluminium rot away. But the cadmium also breakdowns in to a powdery residue. Which requires special cleaning measures to remove. Then replace the connector with a more maritime friendly one.
I would like to think LM have correctly sourced the connectors for the B and C versions of the F35 correctly for the maritime environment. But I would not be surprised if this was overlooked.
I like the whole “it’s not an issue, but we have developed a whole new coating to deal with the issue…” if it’s not an issue you don’t need to go to the expense of fixing it, unless it’s really an issue 🙄
There is no alternative. Europe hasn’t even flown a 5th gen fighter.