would have been nice to see it do... something else
[QUOTE=abcpea;50707464]would have been nice to see it do... something else[/QUOTE]
I don't know why but this irks me too.
In the 60s the harrier had one control to angle the thrust nozzles downward and it could dance in circles.
Guess you can't really push the B yet because of either software limitations or fear it'll fall apart like a fragile Macbook
[QUOTE=abcpea;50707464]would have been nice to see it do... something else[/QUOTE]
I was at Fairford like three days before this was recorded, if they followed the same routine, and it looks like it is, then it was slowing down into a hover from a full display
You can probably find videos of the full display
The most amazing technology the human race has ever seen and everyone in this thread is complaining it doesn't do something more interesting.
Don't know how to say it but can it take off using that jet that keeps it in midair? Like so it doesn't have to use a runway?
[QUOTE=Complifusedv2;50707553]Don't know how to say it but can it take off using that jet that keeps it in midair? Like so it doesn't have to use a runway?[/QUOTE]
I believe it can, yes. But since doing that bleeds fuel like a tanker fire, it's almost never actually used in practice. Instead, it uses the same system tilted at about a 45-degree angle to make its takeoff distance way shorter. Combine this with those carriers that have a ramp at the end of the flight deck and you get something that could take off from a pocket ruler for cheaps.
The term is VTOL btw, which stands for Vertical-TakeOff-and-Landing.
[editline]fgjkh[/editline]
Here is a video of it taking off vertically:
[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zW28Mb1YvwY[/media]
[QUOTE=Complifusedv2;50707553]Don't know how to say it but can it take off using that jet that keeps it in midair? Like so it doesn't have to use a runway?[/QUOTE]
The F-35B is capable of VTOL
[editline]14th July 2016[/editline]
Like above, whether it gets explicitly used as VTOL is another question
It will never replace the a-10 shaped hole ripped out of my heart
[QUOTE=Jack32;50707545]The most amazing technology the human race has ever seen[/QUOTE]
uh, no?
Shame it's too late to scrap these things, the F-22 is far better imo (and cheaper too)
VTOL is really gimmicky
The tech innovations of today make the past looks so bad oh... [video=youtube;VBG7fkHlPY4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBG7fkHlPY4[/video]
[QUOTE=Evanstr;50707728]The tech innovations of today make the past looks so bad oh... [video=youtube;VBG7fkHlPY4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBG7fkHlPY4[/video][/QUOTE]
jfc you owe me a pair of fucking eardrums
[QUOTE=Jack32;50707545]The most amazing technology the human race has ever seen.[/QUOTE]
no
[t]http://blogs-images.forbes.com/bridaineparnell/files/2015/03/Short-Circuit-Stalls-Large-Hadron-Colliders-Restart1.jpg[/t]
Fuck wastes of money that take off straight up, fuck a giant hula hoop buried in switzerland or wherever, fuck modern medicine, the real best technology is video games, hands down
[QUOTE=SnakeHead;50707704]Shame it's too late to scrap these things, the F-22 is far better imo (and cheaper too)
VTOL is really gimmicky[/QUOTE]
[video=youtube_share;LyHlp7tJrxY]http://youtu.be/LyHlp7tJrxY?t=8m28s[/video]
In response to cost, skip to 8:29, the F-22 has a twice as high flyaway cost and is likely to become more expensive to maintain than the F-35 over time due to limited production numbers
In response to capability, the F-22 may have superior kinematic performance, but in every other aspect it's worse, be it information processing, stealth, or having an IRST system, and the kinematics don't mean shit nowadays as aerial combat is no longer dogfighting, it's firing missiles at each other from 20+ km away
And the reason the B version exists is because you can't launch an F/A-18 from an LHD
Looks like it has better VTOL control/stability than the Harrier.
[QUOTE=LoneWolf_Recon;50708280]Looks like it has better VTOL control/stability than the Harrier.[/QUOTE]
Considering the harrier used it's own thrust to control it's ascent and decent while the F-35B uses both that and a lift-fan yes, it's going to be way better.
It's also very 'new' technology but not the first to attempt to use a lift-fan, I believe the Russians attempted something similar to the harrier which used a lift-fan but it didn't work.
[QUOTE=niiiiiiiiok;50707629]It will never replace the a-10 shaped hole ripped out of my heart[/QUOTE]
I bet it could. Aside from the 30mm and loiter time, it does everything else the A-10 can do better to the extreme
Stealth
Can be used in Air to Air
Much faster
HUGE situational awareness
Can carry 2,000 pounds MORE munitions than the A-10
Can detect missile launches like you wouldn't believe (During a test flight it tracked a missile launch over the horizon. It was a Falcon 9 rocket launching into space. More than 800 miles away)
No need for a targeting pod for Air to Ground taking up a pylon on the wing as it has one built into the plane
And it's about as durable. It has a titanium skeleton, with systems isolated from one another that all have backups. Though, the A-10 was designed to be able to fly with one engine out, 1 of it's vertical stabilizers gone, and half of one wing gone. But the A-10 is slow and not something you can take unless you have air superiority. The F-35 however can go into those places
We should still keep the A-10's, though. You don't see us getting rid of all our helicopters because we have Ospreys
[QUOTE=Thomo_UK;50707485]I don't know why but this irks me too.
In the 60s the harrier had one control to angle the thrust nozzles downward and it could dance in circles.
Guess you can't really push the B yet because of either software limitations or fear it'll fall apart like a fragile Macbook[/QUOTE]
Sounds like you know a lot about the F-35B. You're making assumptions about the software and the strength of the jet?
[QUOTE=TheTalon;50708363]I bet it could. Aside from the 30mm and loiter time, it does everything else the A-10 can do better to the extreme[/QUOTE]
But can it go BRRRRRRRRR and fly with literally half of the craft missing? :v:
[QUOTE=SnakeHead;50707704]VTOL is really gimmicky[/QUOTE]
Far from it, It enables planes that could only be launched from an airbase to be launched from a carrier.
i like jets
[QUOTE=Evilaviator;50709048]Sounds like you know a lot about the F-35B. You're making assumptions about the software and the strength of the jet?[/QUOTE]
The fact that the F-35's maximum capability is linked to the development of it's software, yes.
Also the RAF doesn't have many B's yet, I doubt they would take such risks with it.
[QUOTE=Pilotguy97;50707588]I believe it can, yes. But since doing that bleeds fuel like a tanker fire, it's almost never actually used in practice. Instead, it uses the same system tilted at about a 45-degree angle to make its takeoff distance way shorter. Combine this with those carriers that have a ramp at the end of the flight deck and you get something that could take off from a pocket ruler for cheaps.
The term is VTOL btw, which stands for Vertical-TakeOff-and-Landing.[/QUOTE]
the B will never be more than STOVL in practice because it can't take off vertically while loaded and fully fueled
[editline]14th July 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=Reagy;50709063]But can it go BRRRRRRRRR and fly with literally half of the craft missing? :v:[/QUOTE]
yes, and the a-10 can't do the latter either
[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJhTDzeMYkI[/media]
a-10 titanium bathtub is a myth; at most it can survive being nicked by triple a fire. you might be thinking of the f-15 that survived after losing 90% of a wing
[QUOTE=Jund;50709192]you might be thinking of the f-15 that survived after losing 90% of a wing[/QUOTE]
I will be telling that story to my grandchildren.
[video=youtube;M359poNjvVA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M359poNjvVA[/video]
[QUOTE=lekkimsm;50710795]I will be telling that story to my grandchildren.
[video=youtube;M359poNjvVA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M359poNjvVA[/video][/QUOTE]
[img]http://cdn-live.warthunder.com/uploads/81/3c756506e89f614de71f0f313ff1bec93ae960/1381128915411.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=SnakeHead;50707704]Shame it's too late to scrap these things, the F-22 is far better imo (and cheaper too)
VTOL is really gimmicky[/QUOTE]
Not when the majority of your runways were under threat of total destruction via Russian Cruise Missiles.
VTOL was designed to let the jet land/take off anywhere, even if it's home base runaway was completely obliterated.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
