F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

[Ron5]

Probably not. Podded guns tend to wibble about a bit which doesn't help accuracy. Also not great for RCS.

Saw my first flying F-35 the other day, taking off from D-M as I was driving by. Scooted off pretty darned fast, plenty of decibels. Good to see.

Oops nearly forgot to say thanks for the piccy. Nice one.

[The Armchair Soldier]

Some nice footage here showing one of the UK's F-35B's in trials:

[-Eddie-]

Some nice footage here showing one of the UK's F-35B's in trials

Nice find, thanks.

[xav]

Video: USMC F-35B STOVL Aircraft Conducting Field Carrier Landing Practice

The United States Marine Corps (USMC) released a video showing F-35B (the short take-off and vertical-landing STOVL variant) pilots performing short take off and vertical landings as part of required flying field carrier landing practices (FCLP). The pilots are from Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 121 based out of Marine Corps Air Station Yuma, Arizona.

http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.ph ... ew&id=2717

Is something similar (the facility) planned in the UK ?

[Gabriele]

Video: USMC F-35B STOVL Aircraft Conducting Field Carrier Landing Practice

The United States Marine Corps (USMC) released a video showing F-35B (the short take-off and vertical-landing STOVL variant) pilots performing short take off and vertical landings as part of required flying field carrier landing practices (FCLP). The pilots are from Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 121 based out of Marine Corps Air Station Yuma, Arizona.

http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.ph ... ew&id=2717

Is something similar (the facility) planned in the UK ?

Not quite, i don't think. There's the HMS Siskin dummy deck at Culdrose, but that is used to train in deck handling, not in actual air operations. While at Marham there will be for sure 3 landing pads for VTOL practice, but i don't think a dummy CVF deck is planned.

[SKB]

RN's F-35B's won't be landing vertically all the time on the QEC ships anyway, because they're planning SRVL landings instead. Saves fuel and the deck surface.

[bobp]

There is a ski jump in the USA but I don't think they are using it yet. Also I don't know if the SRVL software has been fully developed yet.

[Gabriele]

There is a ski jump in the USA but I don't think they are using it yet. Also I don't know if the SRVL software has been fully developed yet.

Actually, ski jump trials are supposedly ongoing in this period, although after an initial report in the press last month or so, not much has been reported about it so far.
As for SRVL, on land it is already common to see F-35Bs do rolling vertical landings. I don't know if there is much of a software change per se when it comes to do it on a ship. Some symbology to be added to the display, possibly, something more akin to what is found on F-35C (indeed, deck simulations for development where being done in sinergy with the C's needs). For the rest it is probably more a case of training, writing down the procedure, and getting deck light system right on the ship.


Read today that the infrastructure work at RAF Marham should begin early this autumn. Although it has not been specified what the current 300 million contracts cover.
Under Project HARRIS, the Tornado GR4 squadrons are "finding efficiencies" (cough) and working to accommodate IX Squadron away from the HAS and structures it used to occupy, as these will be redeveloped to become the home of 617 Sqn by 2018. A contract had been let earlier for the VTOL pads, and i think (but i'm not sure) that runway work is also planned.
The most interesting part however is going to be the building for the ALIS terminal; the Integrated Crew Training facility and the MRO line, if the latter is still planned. A while ago i read the plan was to have a hangar for the MRO maintenance line, and another structure for the stealth coating application and testing. But things might have changed in the meanwhile.

[bobp]

Thanks Gabriele, for that information. I was aware of the rolling landings on land. Doing on a ship that is moving as well as pitching up and down is a little more difficult. The SRVL software developed by Qinetic using a Harrier jump jet is supposed to help automate this process. Your news on RAF Marham is interesting, a lot of money to be spent on infrastructure, buildings etc.

[shark bait]

awesome videos. Is it just me or does the F35 look much more composed when hovering than the harrier? Looks amazing and effortless, suppose that's down to the lift fan and control systems.

Say what you like about the troubled jet, but at least it looks awesome! I can just tell there will be many wargasms around here when it first lands on HMS Queen Elisabeth, rightfully so too!

[SKB]

QinetiQ's VAAC (Vectored-thrust Aircraft Advanced Control) Harrier doing an automatic hands-free approach and landing on Invincible, 2005


QinetiQ would seem very capable of writing the SRLV software for the F-35B

And if you think that's impressive, watch ITN's Lawrence McGinty (a man who can't even drive a car) LAND the VAAC Harrier!


These systems developed in the VAAC Harrier, will be put into the F-35B

[Tony Williams]

RN's F-35B's won't be landing vertically on the QEC ships anyway, because they're planning SRVL landings instead. Saves fuel and deck surface.

It also allows unused weapons to be brought back, since the maximum weight is higher for a rolling landing than for a vertical one. Jettisoning dumb bombs before landing might be acceptable, but dumping very expensive PGMs is undesirable.

[jonas]

RN's F-35B's won't be landing vertically on the QEC ships anyway, because they're planning SRVL landings instead. Saves fuel and deck surface.

It also allows unused weapons to be brought back, since the maximum weight is higher for a rolling landing than for a vertical one. Jettisoning dumb bombs before landing might be acceptable, but dumping very expensive PGMs is undesirable.

This is exactly the reason for SRVL, it doesn't mean that vertical landings won't be taking place. In fact during flying ops aircraft movement on deck will probably in certain circumstances preclude an SRVL.

[The Armchair Soldier]

RAF Typhoons flying with an F-35:

[Ron5]

A rolling landing implies a chance of a bolter which implies bring back margins to allow a go around presumably including ordnance dump followed by VL. Been a while since the RN practiced those.

[donald_of_tokyo]

It looks like F-35C does not use after burner at its launch.

Is it the same for F-18s?

[Gabriele]

It looks like F-35C does not use after burner at its launch.

I think it will use it, when fully loaded. They have not gotten to that yet.

[jonas]

First F35b squadron should now be on USS Wasp for for operational test period :-

http://www.yumasun.com/news/yuma-s-f--s ... aa26c.html

[bobp]

I can remember reading about the F35 back in the 1990's its now 2015, due to be in service with the RAF in 2018. That makes it at least 25 years old design wise. Thinking how computers and mobile phones have evolved in the last 25 years I wonder what is being thought of today. Some of the electronic parts used in the F35 will be obsolete soon surely.

[downsizer]

That is hardly a new phenomenon with military equipment

[Gabriele]

I can remember reading about the F35 back in the 1990's its now 2015, due to be in service with the RAF in 2018. That makes it at least 25 years old design wise. Thinking how computers and mobile phones have evolved in the last 25 years I wonder what is being thought of today. Some of the electronic parts used in the F35 will be obsolete soon surely.

You were reading of the studies for what would become the JSF, more like. The X-35 and X-32 demonstrators were developed on a contract dating 1997, flew in 2001; the X-35 was selected as base for the the F-35, and the actual F-35 first flew in the still relatively near 2006.

[bobp]

You are of course correct the first production "cough" f35 planes began production in 2006, and to date almost 200 have been produced or are in production. A lot of these planes are going to need significant work and remanufacture at some point because of problems discovered due to flight testing. Indeed it is unusual that these planes are being built before development is completed, it is like buying a Television that only works in black and white but later on you can have colour, hopefully if we can get it to work.

[Gabriele]

You are of course correct the first production "cough" f35 planes began production in 2006, and to date almost 200 have been produced or are in production. A lot of these planes are going to need significant work and remanufacture at some point because of problems discovered due to flight testing. Indeed it is unusual that these planes are being built before development is completed, it is like buying a Television that only works in black and white but later on you can have colour, hopefully if we can get it to work.

At least the bill for the retrofits, scaremongering aside, for now is expected to be relatively small. Also "a lot" is relative. For the US, it'll be more than one hundred aircraft (to varying degrees, early LRIPs are one thing, LRIPs 6 onwards another entirely), but over their huge purchase...? it is not quite that dramatic.
For other customers, we are talking handfuls, unless there are further huge slips determining major differences in the next LRIPs. From the LRIP 6 onwards, the electronics are those intended for Block III, and another physical modifications have mostly been adopted. From LRIP 9, if it goes according to plan, the F-35B will be directly produced with the redesigned bulkhead.
If that goes well, the UK will have to retrofit some 8 airframes. Not nice, sure, but not quite a nightmare either.

Typhoon has not been hounded as badly by the press, but do we want to talk of Tranche 1...? Of all the bits it lacked, included, until 2007, PIRATE which was not installed...? Especially of how it can't be retrofitted at a decent price to stay relevant, and is just being used as much as possible before it is uncerimoniously dumped, after quite the short career...?

[Old RN]

Given the greater radius of action of an F35B over the F18, does this make USS Wasp with 6 F35B on board more powerful than a US CVN

[bobp]

And what about a F18 with drop tanks surely its range is greater than a f35. Also the ability of the f18 to buddy flight refuel.