Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

F-35B Short Takeoff/Vertical Landing On USS WASP
http://www.angelfire.com/ak2/intelligencerreport/f35.html ^

Posted on 02/13/2012 10:43:21 AM PST by navysealdad

The F-35B short takeoff/vertical landing variant completed ship suitability testing aboard the USS WASP (LHD-1) off the coast of Virginia in October 2011. Combined, F-35B test aircraft BF-2 and BF-4 accomplished 72 short takeoffs and 72 vertical landings during the three-week testing period. VIDEO

(Excerpt) Read more at angelfire.com ...


TOPICS: Chit/Chat; Military/Veterans
KEYWORDS: f35b; sourcetitlenoturl

1 posted on 02/13/2012 10:43:26 AM PST by navysealdad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: navysealdad

Well, that’s impressive. Really impressive.


2 posted on 02/13/2012 10:50:05 AM PST by Ole Okie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: navysealdad

When I piloted aircraft, given they were only Tomahawks and Warriors, my elevators moved up on takeoff, pushing the tail down and the nose up, and away I, or we, went.

Every takeoff showed the elevators down, so what gives?


3 posted on 02/13/2012 10:53:27 AM PST by benewton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ole Okie

VTOL may make large scale aircraft carrier obsolete

There is less risk to a bunch of smaller targets/ships....a Nimitz class aircraft carrier is a great big target and consumes an entire battle group to try to protect it.


4 posted on 02/13/2012 10:56:37 AM PST by FreedomProtector
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ole Okie

This aircraft will save a huge number of lives, and aircraft (money).


5 posted on 02/13/2012 10:57:15 AM PST by UCANSEE2 (Lame and ill-informed post)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: navysealdad

sweet....

On the day Obama’s budget is out. Let’s see, cut funding for the F-35 that strikes fear into the heart of our enemies and keeps the wolf at bay. Or tell lazy scammers that they don’t get other people’s money anymore.... Decisions, decisions...


6 posted on 02/13/2012 10:59:17 AM PST by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: benewton
Every takeoff showed the elevators down, so what gives?

A different angle of thrust. Your jets were directed backwards only, and the only way to keep the nose up is to move the elevators up, just as in most planes.

These planes are focusing their thrust DOWNWARD, just behind the pilot. The NOSE is being propelled upward and needs no elevators to raise it. The ELEVATORS are primarily being used as FLAPS, during STO.

7 posted on 02/13/2012 11:02:06 AM PST by UCANSEE2 (Lame and ill-informed post)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: navysealdad; ExTexasRedhead

Must see TV, Karen


8 posted on 02/13/2012 11:03:38 AM PST by knarf (I say things that are true ... I have no proof ... but they're true)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: benewton
Jr physicist here so only speculation -

Did you notice that the exhaust was also vectored down? I wonder if this was to help with the ground effect or to assist the exhaust in vectoring to achieve more vertical push???

9 posted on 02/13/2012 11:06:14 AM PST by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: benewton

I wonder if the position of the elevators has something to do with the short take off. The lift fan up front and the downward pointed exhaust in the back probably makes a takeoff in an F-35 much different than a conventional jet.


10 posted on 02/13/2012 11:10:17 AM PST by yawningotter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: navysealdad
This old-school carrier sailor gives you thumbs up for that post. Very impressive.
11 posted on 02/13/2012 11:11:22 AM PST by NavyCanDo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ole Okie
I wonder how much fuel they have left after vertical launch? I bet they have to top off before the mission...

Mike

12 posted on 02/13/2012 11:12:51 AM PST by MichaelP (The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill the world with fools ~HS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ole Okie
I wonder how much fuel they have left after vertical launch? I bet they have to top off before the mission...

Mike

13 posted on 02/13/2012 11:14:02 AM PST by MichaelP (The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill the world with fools ~HS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MichaelP

They generally don’t take off vertically for that reason — fuel consumption. You can get airborne with more payload with a rolling take-off. They only land vertically.


14 posted on 02/13/2012 11:18:09 AM PST by Tallguy (It's all 'Fun and Games' until somebody loses an eye!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: FreedomProtector
VTOL may make large scale aircraft carrier obsolete

Not exactly. Go take a look at the range/payload of the F-35B (STOVL) vs the F-35C (Carrier). The price of that big honking lift fan for vertical landing is that you have to give up a quarter of your fuel load and 5 tons of ordinance. The F-35B isn't going to be doing any long range strike missions with only a 450 nmi combat radius. Great for a defensive fighter, but most of the work carriers have done since 1945 has been long range strike.

In addition there is the old maxim that quantity has a quality all its own. A Nimitz class has an air wing of 85-90 aircraft. A Wasp class in sea control mode carries a complement of only 20. So you need to buy four Wasp's to get as many planes into combat as one Nimitz.

Finally you mention escorts. Well Wasp, at 45,000 tos is a capital ship. She isn't going anyplace without escorts. So you don't get savings there.

The advantage of STOVL is that it lets you use the Wasp class flexibly depending on the needs. They can be a light carrier, or a marine assault transport. They can provide the defensive fighter cover for a marine task force hence freeing up the big decks for the strike mission. They complement rather than replace the big deck carriers.
15 posted on 02/13/2012 11:27:57 AM PST by GonzoGOP (There are millions of paranoid people in the world and they are all out to get me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: navysealdad

For all of the negative press I have read about the F-35B you’d think the plane is an obsolete Turkey.But then this is the same press that said the F-15,16 and 18 were outclassed by everything the Russians produced and they could not fly and fight out of desert and winter environments.

I think we should disregard everything the enemy press has to say about these programs.As far as I’m concerned it’s a worthwhile expendature of our tax dollars unlike the Solyndra and Green energy fiasco.


16 posted on 02/13/2012 11:33:00 AM PST by puppypusher (The World is going to the dogs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: navysealdad

Wonder if they are easier to control in VSTOL than the Harrier.


17 posted on 02/13/2012 11:36:24 AM PST by Vinnie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: navysealdad
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2828702/posts
18 posted on 02/13/2012 11:38:43 AM PST by Vroomfondel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: navysealdad

That was very nice!


19 posted on 02/13/2012 11:47:18 AM PST by GeronL (The Right to Life came before the Right to Pursue Happiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: navysealdad
Here are some of the pics on my US Navy 21st Century site about the Joint Strike Fighter, and specifically the F-35B.






F-35B On the USS Wasp during Quals

Other sites:

WORLD-WIDR AIRCRAFT CARRIERS

AEGIS VESSELS OF THE WORLD

THE RISING SEA DRAGON IN ASIA

20 posted on 02/13/2012 12:03:00 PM PST by Jeff Head (Liberty is not free. Never has been, never will be. (www.dragonsfuryseries.com))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GonzoGOP

A CVW TOE is not composed entirely of strike/fighter aircraft.


21 posted on 02/13/2012 12:06:57 PM PST by A.A. Cunningham (Barry Soetoro is a Kenyan communist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Vinnie
VSTOL(sic)

STOVL

22 posted on 02/13/2012 12:08:24 PM PST by A.A. Cunningham (Barry Soetoro is a Kenyan communist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: FreedomProtector
The STOVL aircraft like the F-35B and the V-22 Osprey, particularly when they and deploy develop the AEW and ASW variants of the Opsrey, will make our LHA and LHD vessels effective sea control carriers themselves, able to escort PhibRons and other Task Forces, while freeing up the large fast attack carriers for more important power projection duties in higher threat areas.

I doubt seriously, at least within the next fifty years that the large carriers will be rendered obsolete, patricularly as the new Ford Class Carriers come online with their new, 200% more powerful reactors enabling EMALS, Laser CIWS, and even rail gun technology to be employed.

23 posted on 02/13/2012 12:09:15 PM PST by Jeff Head (Liberty is not free. Never has been, never will be. (www.dragonsfuryseries.com))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: FreedomProtector

You forget that VTOL is much more limited in payload than a catapult launched aircraft.


24 posted on 02/13/2012 12:11:30 PM PST by Blood of Tyrants (Never believe anything in politics until it has been officially denied.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: GonzoGOP
Amen and spot on IMHO. See my post 23
25 posted on 02/13/2012 12:14:34 PM PST by Jeff Head (Liberty is not free. Never has been, never will be. (www.dragonsfuryseries.com))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: GonzoGOP

I want to echo your response and add just a little. The F35B is going to the Marines ONLY. It’s purpose in life is to go where the ground troops go and provide them with air cover. So they can be deployed off the ship for beach assault or forward deployed as an invasion force moves away from the beach. The other variants can’t do that (obviously). This plane has exactly the same mission as the Harrier did.

It can OBVIOUSLY be used as fleet defense of a Wasp based task force, but the real use is to protect Marines on the ground.


26 posted on 02/13/2012 12:19:53 PM PST by fremont_steve
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Vinnie

From what I have read, the difference is day and night. The F-35B is as stable as the Harrier is unstable.


27 posted on 02/13/2012 12:20:51 PM PST by Redleg Duke ("Madison, Wisconsin is 30 square miles surrounded by reality.", L. S. Dryfus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: navysealdad
the burn rate must be phenomenal though vs standard takeoff/landing...
28 posted on 02/13/2012 12:38:34 PM PST by Chode (American Hedonist - *DTOM* -ww- NO Pity for the LAZY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GonzoGOP
British Harrier landing on converted cargo ship Atlantic Conveyor during the Falklands War.


29 posted on 02/13/2012 3:54:15 PM PST by PapaBear3625 (In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. - George Orwell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head

The design of the Ford Class Carrier appears to have the island well aft. It might be interesting to see an analysis of island placement over time.


30 posted on 02/13/2012 4:21:19 PM PST by 2nd Bn, 11th Mar (The "p" in Democrat stands for patriotism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: 2nd Bn, 11th Mar

They eliminated the aft, starboard elevator and have the Island placed further aft.

As a result there will be three elevators instead of four.

Apparantly, U.S. naval analysis indicated that this would increase the ability and flexability of aircraft movement on the deck and increase sortie rates and efficiency.


31 posted on 02/13/2012 4:28:44 PM PST by Jeff Head (Liberty is not free. Never has been, never will be. (www.dragonsfuryseries.com))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Vinnie

They greatly are easier. If you ever saw the documentary for the f-35 competition it is so much easier. Guy took his hands off the controls and it stayed stable hovering. Can’t do that with a Harrier and live.


32 posted on 02/13/2012 6:16:03 PM PST by Secret Agent Man (I'd like to tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2

This is essentially correct.

In V/STOL (or STOVL) mode the F-35 is dependent upon engine and lift-fan power getting it into the air as opposed to CTOL mode for most fixed-wing aircraft where air speed over the control services gets it airborne. In V/STOL mode, the F-35 is “lifting” of the lip of the ship’s deck via the downward force of its combined engine and fan as opposed to “flying” off of it.

“They generally don’t take off vertically for that reason — fuel consumption. You can get airborne with more payload with a rolling take-off. They only land vertically...”

Correct. The RAN 30 years ago perfected ops with the Harrier. They are at best with rolling, un-assisted loaded take-offs and vertical landings. Vertical take-offs are extremely un-efficient in anything other than the lightest of loads.

“For all of the negative press I have read about the F-35B you’d think the plane is an obsolete Turkey.”

Cost overruns, delays, etc. Lockheed is doing a fantastic job of wringing the utmost performance in a single compact airframe that could possibly be expected. The plane is meeting its performance goals and doing so within reason. I don’t have a whole of trouble with the product we’ve seen so far.

“The F35B is going to the Marines ONLY”

No. Just for the Marines it’s 400 airplanes. The -B is also intended for the Spanish, Italians, and Indians now. It was originally intended for the RAN but they’ve since moved to the -C USN STOL carrier version. Future potential customers are the Thai Navy, the Brazilian Navy, and maybe Australia from their helo LPDs.


33 posted on 02/13/2012 8:49:43 PM PST by FAA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: FAA
In V/STOL (or STOVL) mode the F-35 is dependent upon engine and lift-fan power getting it into the air

When taking off from an amphibious assault ship. Rolling takeoffs from land bases sans lift fan can also be executed.

They are at best with rolling, un-assisted loaded take-offs

Unassisted? What are you attempting to say?

Vertical take-offs are extremely un-efficient(sic)

inefficient

It was originally intended for the RAN(sic)

Both the RN and RAF, no such animal as the RAN.

The -B is also intended for the Spanish, Italians, and Indians now.

Incorrect. Neither Spain or India has signed up for any variant of the F-35 let alone the B. A sales pitch to India outside the MMRCA has been made but nothing more.

-C USN STOL(sic) carrier version.

CV

34 posted on 02/13/2012 10:29:54 PM PST by A.A. Cunningham (Barry Soetoro is a Kenyan communist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson