New VTO aircraft
 

MegaSack DRAW - This year's winner is user - rgwb
We will be in touch

[Closed] New VTO aircraft

52 Posts
25 Users
0 Reactions
200 Views
Posts: 1547
Full Member
Topic starter
 

But not ours unfortunately

Still a fine piece of engineering


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 4:25 pm
Posts: 1330
Free Member
 

Some parts of it is made in the UK


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 4:28 pm
 Kuco
Posts: 7203
Full Member
 

Nice vid.


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 4:35 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Yes, you can see bits of them on the deck after take-off


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 4:35 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

VTO? You sure? Very wasteful of fuel. More likely to be be assisted take-off and vertical landing.


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 4:37 pm
Posts: 4231
Free Member
 

Not exactly being gentle when they set it down are they? You see the flex in the nose landing gear about 2m53s in? Dampers aren't even kashima coated...


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 4:39 pm
 Spin
Posts: 7678
Free Member
 

VTO? You sure? Very wasteful of fuel. More likely to be be assisted take-off and vertical landing.

STOVL? Short Take Off Verical Landing?


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 4:44 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

STOVL? Short Take Off Verical Landing?

That's my understanding.

Like the Harrier, MIGHT be capable of VTO, but won't be able to use it with payload and expect to get to target and back with fuel remaining.

A version definitely not VTO or even STO
B version is STO
C version is carrier based so I'd guess /ramp/assisted/STO


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 4:48 pm
Posts: 1617
Free Member
 

Incredible plane. The 2 tonne lift fan behind the cockpit is a bit of a weight penalty though over the non-[b]STOVL[/b] one though.


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 4:49 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Not exactly being gentle when they set it down are they? You see the flex in the nose landing gear about 2m53s in? Dampers aren't even kashima coated...

I was thinking the same. Might be ok on carriers, but no good on a strava black run.


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 5:04 pm
 XXX
Posts: 1
Free Member
 

It's a lot more Britsh than you give it credit for. All the lift system is from the UK...


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 5:21 pm
Posts: 13594
Free Member
 

I think the UK has contributed about 10% of the development cost to the F35 as well.


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 5:26 pm
Posts: 33564
Full Member
 

STOVL? Short Take Off Verical Landing?

That's what the video showed, short take-off from a flat deck with rear exhaust swivelled full down and front fan full on, and full hover and vertical landing.


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 5:36 pm
 hora
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Airplane spotters


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 5:39 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

I can assure you that we ARE buying the C variant for our own use. (Why the F would we contribute this much to something we werent) It is STOVL (short take off verical landing) as when it is under its full payload it cannot take off verically. I can also bore you with why people seem to think it is crap but infact the STOVL versions are the ones suffering from the problems they balame it with. so the american buy crap and we are fine. 😀


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 5:42 pm
Posts: 1
Free Member
 

The STOVL versions of both power plants use the Rolls-Royce LiftSystem the massive fan just behind the pilot, BAe Systems not quite British anymore but they provides rear fuselage and empennages, horizontal and vertical tails, crew life support and escape systems, Electronic warfare systems, fuel system, and Flight Control Software

Awesome bit of technology and probably the last manned fighter


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 5:46 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

http://www.raf.mod.uk/equipment/f35jointstrikefighter.cfm
The us Call it the JSF( joint strike fighter) but we reffer to it as the JCA( Joint combat aircraft) i can bore you with reasons for that as well!
The best thing is that due to my age if i go to uni and apply to be a pilot when i reach that age and i get selected and selected again and again twice more my job may be flying that beauty!


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 5:47 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

RE: kona

The engine you saw just now was a Pratt & Whitney but once it reaches full production it will be a RR 😀


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 5:50 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

any questions just ask away!


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 5:51 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Very pretty corporate video BUT have they fixed the bits of it catching fire/melting issue when it uses it's afterburner for any length of time, is the generator reliability sorted because the last thing I read was that it had a 10th the desired/planned life span and was an absolute sod to get at and if it's anything like the F22 it'll spend hideous amounts of time in the hanger being maintained/fixed.


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 5:59 pm
Posts: 49
Free Member
 

any questions just ask away!

What can you tell me about the autonomic systems on this aircraft and how they are at odds with the current modus operandi of the British military support to flying?


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 6:03 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

These issues are being sorted it has already been in dev lenger than the 22 and wont see service till 2018 sonnest. also lockheed designed the F-22 on their own with out us and now we are helping it will def work. You know they couldn't have broken mach 1 with out our help? every time they went to correct its course the air flow was destabilised and it stalled. we were also working to break mach 1 but gave up and sent our plans the the US. they noticed that we had the WHOLE surface moving whilst they kept the same design of aileron. they put the two together and BAM


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 6:03 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Sorry TooTall I really can't say. I cannot say anything that may give advantage to the enemies of the crown. that is how it is.


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 6:12 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Should have gone with conventional carrier aircraft in my opinion, looks very high maintenance! Added to that, not very likely I know, but when they enter service what if there is a problem that grounds the type? Can't run F18 super hornets off a ski ramp!


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 6:18 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Typical UK defence project "yeah you can make some of the bits,you just need to buy 50 of em and accept being bummed as the price goes up" Oh and you need to build some aircraft carriers to suit them, its got more ****ing folding doors on it than the wickes and B&Q christmas sale put together

any questions just ask away!

Do you know what ITAR is ,

Further google yak 141 mega afterburner awesumz with russian stylee


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 6:27 pm
Posts: 8660
Full Member
 

Should have gone with conventional carrier aircraft in my opinion

Aye. Would have allowed buying Super Hornets/Rafales off the shelf if the F-35C (which is the CATOBAR variant) fails. No fallback if the F-35B doesn't work out.

Not exactly being gentle when they set it down are they?

They say in the Air Force a landing's OK
If the pilot gets out and can still walk away,
But in the Fleet Air Arm the prospect is grim
If the landing's piss-poor and the pilot can't swim.


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 6:30 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Do you know what ITAR is

I'm sure he has all the necessary knowledge sharing licences in place 😉


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 6:32 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

yep and no Im not american and nor have i been informed of what the americans are doing exactly. Keep the questions vauge and non harmful and I'll try and answer. (if there has ben a press release i can generally help you understand that) I can talk about the vauge details of the Suit the pilot will be wearing and his HUD if ya like


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 6:32 pm
Posts: 8660
Full Member
 

Keep the questions vauge and non harmful and I'll try and answer.

OK, what's the derivation of 'wafu' anyway?


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 6:34 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Re: navy

Yh and no. they will fly rotary off the decks whilst the RAF will be stationed off the ship. The forces will be mixed and socialise but putting a sailor in charge of a fast jet of that calibre aint happenin


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 6:34 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

lol at legend


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 6:34 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

WAFU: is navy for Weapons And Fuel Users.
anything off one of their ships that uses the above


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 6:35 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

oops no I need to correct my self there ". These are the nice chaps that fix the odd Lynx/Merlin/Sea King from time to time. Mainly found lounging in the hangar sipping tea and swapping dits of the night out before. The term itself is an acronym of Wet And Flaming Useless. It applies to any member of the Fleet Air Arm." had to double check 😛


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 6:38 pm
Posts: 8660
Full Member
 

The forces will be mixed and socialise but putting a sailor in charge of a fast jet of that calibre aint happenin

Yes the forces will be mixed; however, given the precedent going back to 892NAS and their Phantoms, a majority of the aircrew will be dark blue. Sharky Ward demonstrated that the RN is quite capable of flying fast jets effectively.


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 6:38 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

True. but the extended training required for the F-35 is run by the RAF


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 6:39 pm
Posts: 8660
Full Member
 

True. but the extended training required for the F-35 is run by the RAF

Not quite the same as saying a sailor flying the plane 'ain't happening'.


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 6:44 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Over simplification but yes. I was being brief but yes fine you win.


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 6:46 pm
Posts: 8660
Full Member
 

[url= http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/duty_calls.pn g" target="_blank">http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/duty_calls.pn g"/> [/img][/url]


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 6:49 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Where do I sign? It's perfect for the school run!


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 6:51 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

not us or the JCM but cool anyway
Very funny ratherbeintobago


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 6:53 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

A naval aviator would say that:

WAFU: is navy for Weapons And Fuel Users.
anything off one of their ships that uses the above

The rest of the navy might offer "Wet and 'flipping' useless" if you asked them...


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 6:54 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Will people STOP referring to reheat (as invented by the British) as 'afterburners', it's so, well, American. 🙄


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 7:01 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

aaaaawwwwww are we at least allowed to talk about "painting the target"? Always been a personal favourite 8)


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 7:02 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Of course, invented by the RAF for use with the Pathfinder Squadrons. 😉


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 7:04 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

just tell me one thing if you had to go into battle would you want him with you....

potters off to play beach volleyball


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 7:05 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Not exactly being gentle when they set it down are they? You see the flex in the nose landing gear about 2m53s in?

have you seen a "regular" carrier landing lately?


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 7:48 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

"Regular" you say? 2 mins in FTW 😉


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 8:15 pm
Posts: 1
Free Member
 

On the Herc theme Bonkers but awesome


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 8:30 pm
Posts: 0
Full Member
 

I'm sorry, a herc taking off [i]and[/i] landing on a carrier!?
**** me!


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 8:31 pm
Posts: 0
Full Member
 

Are those not rockets?


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 8:42 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

21 [i]unarrested[/i] landings.

Fat Albert's STOL capabilities are awesome. He can even taxi backwards, so not need any tugs


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 9:37 pm
Posts: 49
Free Member
 

I cannot say anything that may give advantage to the enemies of the crown.

I'd probably use that excuse if I didn't know who ALIS was.


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 9:46 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

ALIS, who the **** is ALIS?


 
Posted : 01/10/2012 10:04 pm