F35 - how does that work?

[snico]

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

I agree yes, but being over 40 years later....its expected to have a better performance. Just glad the we helped with the design of the F35 on a major scale

Even our Yankee friends love the Harrier!

 

[libby lou lou]

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?

You never watch Thunderbirds?. no wonder you know now't

 

[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?

You never watch Thunderbirds?. no wonder you know now't

i watched Thunderbirds, and i know loads.....

 

[joinerjohn]

I suppose they start pointing the jet back fairly slowly although it does have the lift fan that the Harrier didn't have. Just remember the acceleration of the engine is a lot better than any car. The F35 can probably do 0-60 faster than an F1 racing car. Hmm perhaps not, but can certainly do 0-200 faster.

 

[Monkeh]

The F35 hasn't got a hope in hell of beating an F1 to 0-60. A Typhoon can't, and it's lighter and has a positive thrust/weight ratio!

 

[wreckedit]

Quote.....The Royal Navy's new Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carriers are large enough to support non-STOVL operations and at least one will have catapults and arrestor cables installed to allow F-35C and allied naval aircraft operations.


When fully loaded I guess the F35C wouldn't be able to take off vertically from a carrier so it makes sense to shoot it off the deck as quickly as possible.

 

[joe-90]

Yes because the carrier will be sunk in no time.

 

[snico]

Quote.....The Royal Navy's new Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carriers are large enough to support non-STOVL operations and at least one will have catapults and arrestor cables installed to allow F-35C and allied naval aircraft operations.


When fully loaded I guess the F35C wouldn't be able to take off vertically from a carrier so it makes sense to shoot it off the deck as quickly as possible.

The F35C cant take off vertically anyway, only the F35B has STOVL. The F35c has larger wings though so it can land at slower speeds

 

[Monkeh]

The F35B can't take off vertically either.

 

[snico]

The F35B can't take off vertically either.

True, just land vertically

 

[joinerjohn]

The Harrier can only hover for about 90 seconds. In hover mode , the Harrier relies upon a tank of water to cool the powerplant down. This runs out after approx 90 seconds.. So when they are landing this way, the pilot only has a very short time in which to land. The Harrier also can't take off vertically with a full load.

 

[Monkeh]

The Harrier can take off vertically with a limited combat load, though. The F35B can't even manage it with a full fuel load, it can barely hover with a half tank.

 

[wreckedit]

The F35c has larger wings though so it can land at slower speeds

Also, wings that can be folded.