F35 - how does that work?

[imamartian]

what i mean is... you take off vertically with massive jets pointing at the floor, and then you want to move forwards and fly.... how do you get the jets pointing back quick enough to give you the speed so your wing can give you lift, but not so quick that you lose height and crash and burn?

 

[joinerjohn]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II

Here ya go.

 

[wotan]

what i mean is... you take off vertically with massive jets pointing at the floor, and then you want to move forwards and fly.... how do you get the jets pointing back quick enough to give you the speed so your wing can give you lift, but not so quick that you lose height and crash and burn?

Vectored thrust, ala Harrier nothing new, would imagine though the transition from vertical to horizontal flight is a fine balancing act.

Wotan

 

[wreckedit]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II

Here ya go.

I very informative answer this. I had no idea that Britain was so involved with US aero defence.

Did the PM stop the Harrier programme in favour of the F35C?
No wonder if he did!

 

[imamartian]

ould imagine though the transition from vertical to horizontal flight is a fine balancing act.

Wotan

that's my point in a nutshell....

 

[Monkeh]

ould imagine though the transition from vertical to horizontal flight is a fine balancing act.

Wotan

that's my point in a nutshell....

The F35 doesn't take off vertically. Not loaded at any rate.

You vector the thrust from the nozzle rearwards in order to gain sufficient forward velocity, then you can shut off the lift fan and place the nozzle in normal position, and off she goes. Like the Harrier, but less elegant.

 

[imamartian]

ould imagine though the transition from vertical to horizontal flight is a fine balancing act.

Wotan

that's my point in a nutshell....

The F35 doesn't take off vertically. Not loaded at any rate.

You vector the thrust from the nozzle rearwards in order to gain sufficient forward velocity, then you can shut off the lift fan and place the nozzle in normal position, and off she goes. Like the Harrier, but less elegant.

well it does here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xm7_PPE-8nk

 

[Monkeh]

ould imagine though the transition from vertical to horizontal flight is a fine balancing act.

Wotan

that's my point in a nutshell....

The F35 doesn't take off vertically. Not loaded at any rate.

You vector the thrust from the nozzle rearwards in order to gain sufficient forward velocity, then you can shut off the lift fan and place the nozzle in normal position, and off she goes. Like the Harrier, but less elegant.

well it does here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xm7_PPE-8nk

It's not loaded. The F35B doesn't even have a 1:1 thrust/weight ratio with a full fuel load, let alone weaponry. It's not possible for an armed F35B to take off vertically.

 

[imamartian]

ok... don't want to argue over such a point... but seeing that vid... i would love to know how it goes from going up to going forwards...

it's a bit like throwing a scaffolding plank into the air and then pushing from one end really quickly hoping to go anywhere but down to the ground?!!

 

[Monkeh]

ok... don't want to argue over such a point... but seeing that vid... i would love to know how it goes from going up to going forwards...

it's a bit like throwing a scaffolding plank into the air and then pushing from one end really quickly hoping to go anywhere but down to the ground?!!

Simple, you angle the nozzles (both rear jet nozzle and forward fan nozzle) to provide forward thrust.

 

[Monkeh]

This is the F35 performing a short take off and a vertical landing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XIsIzjVi7j4#t=1m07s

 

[snico]

This is the F35 performing a short take off and a vertical landing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XIsIzjVi7j4#t=1m07s[/QUOTE]

Its only the F35B that does that doesnt it?

Aint there more types of this plane, with only this one capable of short take and vertical landing?

 

[Monkeh]

This is the F35 performing a short take off and a vertical landing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XIsIzjVi7j4#t=1m07s[/QUOTE]

Its only the F35B that does that doesnt it?

Aint there more types of this plane, with only this one capable of short take and vertical landing?

Correct, the F35B is the STVOL version. The F35A is CTOL, and the F35C is CATOBAR.

 

[snico]

This is the F35 performing a short take off and a vertical landing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XIsIzjVi7j4#t=1m07s[/QUOTE]

Its only the F35B that does that doesnt it?

Aint there more types of this plane, with only this one capable of short take and vertical landing?

Correct, the F35B is the STVOL version. The F35A is CTOL, and the F35C is CATOBAR.

Its a cracking plane with all the modern technology etc, with a lot of input from Europe.

I just dont think it has the elegance and the finesse as the Harrier, and to think the Harrier is over 40 years old!

 

[Monkeh]

This is the F35 performing a short take off and a vertical landing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XIsIzjVi7j4#t=1m07s[/QUOTE]

Its only the F35B that does that doesnt it?

Aint there more types of this plane, with only this one capable of short take and vertical landing?

Correct, the F35B is the STVOL version. The F35A is CTOL, and the F35C is CATOBAR.

Its a cracking plane with all the modern technology etc, with a lot of input from Europe.

I just dont think it has the elegance and the finesse as the Harrier, and to think the Harrier is over 40 years old!

As I said, I believe the Harrier to be a far more elegant solution. However it doesn't have nearly the performance of the F35B.

Never forget, though, we got there first, and we had to help the yanks figure out how it all works!