F-35 40 Knot Approach and Landing

[FLYBOYJ]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1eNpp1IfULk

I was told the winds were a little high that day or it might have done a hover landing

 

[wheelsup_cavu]

Cool video.
Even after reading your description I thought they went to slow motion filming for the landing.


Wheels

 

[Matt308]

Way cool.

 

[Waynos]

I was told the winds were a little high that day or it might have done a hover landing

Not too sure about that FBJ. The technique demonstrated here is called the RVL, for 'Rolling Vertical Landing' and was developed by Qinetiq in the UK specifically for operating the F-35 from RN ships. It was developed and demonstrated using the VAAC Harrier.

Because it demonstrated several other advantages such as avoiding ingestion of the exhaust gases back into the intake, plus its greater useable wing-lift at low speeds means that either increased payloads can be returned and landed on the ship or the stress on the propulsion system can be reduced, was also adopted by the USMC as the standard procedure for F-35B vertical landings, so I think this was probably a demo of the standard technique rather than being weather induced.

Nice to see the F-35 doing the manouvre though, all the same.

 

[Wayne Little]

That is Cool!

 

[evangilder]

Wow! That was really cool!

 

[Butters]

The SRVL ( Shipboard Rolling Vertical Landing) technique is being adopted as SOP by both the RN and USMC because the F-35B is too overweight to allow a safe vertical landing while carrying a one ton bomb load. Not to mention avoiding the concentration of 18,000lbs thrust of supersonic, 15-1700 degree gas blasting directly onto the deck.

Anyway, it's sure to provide loads of entertainment for air and deck crews alike
Nothing like 16-18 tons careening across a wet pitching, rolling steel deck at 30mph with no arresting cables or ability to bolter. Lets's hope that they didn't ditch those hefty anti-skid brakes along with the fire extinguishers and hydraulic system safety features when they were trying to lean down that pricey little porker...

JL

 

[Waynos]

One thing about the operational RVL's I didn't mention is that they will be fully automated

 

[FLYBOYJ]

The SRVL ( Shipboard Rolling Vertical Landing) technique is being adopted as SOP by both the RN and USMC because the F-35B is too overweight to allow a safe vertical landing while carrying a one ton bomb load. Not to mention avoiding the concentration of 18,000lbs thrust of supersonic, 15-1700 degree gas blasting directly onto the deck.

Hmmmm....is that a contract requirement? I bet you the deck of a modern carrier could handle that and then some, but I'd like to see your calculations to show that the hot exhaust from the aircraft will blow directly on the deck??? But you know this by experience, right?

Anyway, it's sure to provide loads of entertainment for air and deck crews alike
Nothing like 16-18 tons careening across a wet pitching, rolling steel deck at 30mph with no arresting cables or ability to bolter. Lets's hope that they didn't ditch those hefty anti-skid brakes along with the fire extinguishers and hydraulic system safety features when they were trying to lean down that pricey little porker...

JL

No worse than having several tons of iron picking up a wire at 160 knots on a pitching deck in the middle of the ocean and then going full power upon landing, right? It seems you have a lot experience on carriers to know how dangerous this is right??? But its funny how Harriers currently do that now. Here's a clip for your education, and yes the weather is quite pleasant.
Yahoo! Video Detail for AV-8B Harrier

I know Bosun's Mate that would give anything to have an aircraft on a deck at 30 mph, and oh yea, it also seems you know a lot about moden brake systems on fighters to know that the anti skid system probably wont be functioning at 30 mph, but then again that goes with all your knowlege of the US Navy and carrier operations as well!!!!

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Not too sure about that FBJ. The technique demonstrated here is called the RVL, for 'Rolling Vertical Landing' and was developed by Qinetiq in the UK specifically for operating the F-35 from RN ships. It was developed and demonstrated using the VAAC Harrier

That info came from a Lockheed contact. That day they wanted to do more testing including a vertical landing, I was told it was very windy to do this for flight test purposes.

 

[red admiral]

One thing about the operational RVL's I didn't mention is that they will be fully automated

The picture you posted with the two seat Harrier in the background is the test aircraft specifically for this. First automated vertical landing was a few years ago (2002 I think) when the Harrier picked up Illustrious' location on the data link, automatically flew there and conducted a successful landing on deck. Should make vertical landings on JSF a lot safer.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Vertical load bringback is one of the KPPs for STOVL that it's failing on, exactly why SRVL was developed. Isn't it obvious that the exhaust will blow onto the deck when the aircraft is landing? The gas is quite a lot lower temperature than that stated, and is further cooled from the cold lift fan thrust. I wouldn't expect it to be too much of a problem for carrier decks - dirt strips like Harrier is another issue.

Thanks!

BTW - made contact with a Lockheed buddy and asked him about Butters post - his response was "the plane is putting out over 42,000 pounds!"

I'd say do the math....

 

[Waynos]

Vertical load bringback is one of the KPPs for STOVL that it's failing on, exactly why SRVL was developed. Isn't it obvious that the exhaust will blow onto the deck when the aircraft is landing? The gas is quite a lot lower temperature than that stated, and is further cooled from the cold lift fan thrust. I wouldn't expect it to be too much of a problem for carrier decks - dirt strips like Harrier is another issue..........................................................................

**The picture you posted with the two seat Harrier in the background is the test aircraft specifically for this. First automated vertical landing was a few years ago (2002 I think) when the Harrier picked up Illustrious' location on the data link, automatically flew there and conducted a successful landing on deck. Should make vertical landings on JSF a lot safer.

Which seems a little contradictory.

QinetiQ have been developing RVL techniques and systems since years before the first F-35 was built (as you refer to) yet you seem to be saying, at the same time, that it is being developed asd a sop to the F-35's weight issues (which I myself have debated with FBJ at length in the past). QinetiQ are truly brilliant, but they're not clairvoyant.

In reality the RVL technique, as applied to deck landings, was a part of the RN and RAF's JCA requirement from the beginning.

** yes, thats why I posted it.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Bottom line folks - this aircraft will be a safer and more stable aircraft to bring aboard a carrier. As discussed, its going to carry a lot more efficient weapons that will negate a lot of the weight concerns.

 

[Aaron Brooks Wolters]

Very cool FBJ!! Thank you for sharing.

 

[Butters]

Well, FBJ, I figger i've got as much experience making vertical jet-powered carrier landings as you have, and thanks to my stints as a commercial fisherman in the '80s, I'm guessing that I know a lot more about how rough it gets in North Atlantic winter gales...

As far as calculations about jet exhaust -first, unless they plan on parachuting in the last 50-60 ft, yeah, there would be direct jet exhaust on to the deck during a vertical landing. Which will be not only closer to the deck than a Harrier's but much hotter, faster,and more concentrated, too. As for my temperature figures being incorrect, I guess someone ought'a tell that to the US Navy, cuz here's what they think:

"The F-35B, or short take-off and vertical landing (STOVL), version of the JSF is capable of both
vertical take-off (VTO) and VL, although take-off will typically be via STO. For landing, VL (or
VTOL) pads will be used. This pads will be exposed to 1700ºF and high velocity (Mach #1)
exhaust. This exhaust will melt the top surface of asphalt pavements, and is likely to spall the
surface of standard airfield concrete pavements on the first VL."

http://www.wbdg.org/ccb/NAVFAC/INTCRIT/fy10_01.pdf

The carrier ops bit is a red herring because the SRVL technique is about landing aboard small carriers without nice stuff like tailhooks and arrester cables. And I very much doubt that a deck chief would enjoy an 18 ton UNRESTRAINED tricycle travelling at 30 mph on his little flight deck.

As for the '42,000 lbs vertical thrust', and math, well, I don't remember the exact figures anymore but I do recall that the rollpost controls must be able to instantly extract 6-7000 lbs thrust for safety. Which has to come from somewhere. You do the math.

The real bottom line is that the F-35B possesses marginal performance when it comes to making vertical landings with any kind of a load. And that's what the desperation measure called SRVL is really all about.

JL

 

[pbfoot]

I'm surpried it hasn't got arrestor capability

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Well, FBJ, I figger i've got as much experience making vertical jet-powered carrier landings as you have, and thanks to my stints as a commercial fisherman in the '80s, I'm guessing that I know a lot more about how rough it gets in North Atlantic winter gales...

And I'm sure your boats were the same size as a carrier???

As far as calculations about jet exhaust -first, unless they plan on parachuting in the last 50-60 ft, yeah, there would be direct jet exhaust on to the deck during a vertical landing. Which will be not only closer to the deck than a Harrier's but much hotter, faster,and more concentrated, too. As for my temperature figures being incorrect, I guess someone ought'a tell that to the US Navy, cuz here's what they think:

"The F-35B, or short take-off and vertical landing (STOVL), version of the JSF is capable of both
vertical take-off (VTO) and VL, although take-off will typically be via STO. For landing, VL (or
VTOL) pads will be used. This pads will be exposed to 1700ºF and high velocity (Mach #1)
exhaust. This exhaust will melt the top surface of asphalt pavements, and is likely to spall the
surface of standard airfield concrete pavements on the first VL."

http://www.wbdg.org/ccb/NAVFAC/INTCRIT/fy10_01.pdf

This is addressing ground ops as they are talking about "Runways, Taxiways, and Parking Aprons"

You answered your own issue!

The carrier ops bit is a red herring because the SRVL technique is about landing aboard small carriers without nice stuff like tailhooks and arrester cables. And I very much doubt that a deck chief would enjoy an 18 ton UNRESTRAINED tricycle travelling at 30 mph on his little flight deck.

Wanna bet? Compared to your boat that deck is still huge, even on the smallest carriers...

But then again, I doubt you'll see ops under gale force conditions, and the same holds true for carrier ops at the present times, so your argument is void.

As for the '42,000 lbs vertical thrust', and math, well, I don't remember the exact figures anymore but I do recall that the rollpost controls must be able to instantly extract 6-7000 lbs thrust for safety. Which has to come from somewhere. You do the math.

Between the liftfan and thrust coming from the engine, it will have ample enough thrust to achieve this and then some. I 'll let the Pax River test continue and this will become evident...

The real bottom line is that the F-35B possesses marginal performance when it comes to making vertical landings with any kind of a load. And that's what the desperation measure called SRVL is really all about.

JL

And so far you have nothing to justify that claim. Until this aircraft is condemned and cancelled, you have very little to justify your positions except your opinions...

 

[vikingBerserker]

Nice, great post!

 

[Waynos]

A 'desperation measure' that was in the original JCA requirement and that QinietiQ has been developing for a decade, or did you just choose to ignore that in your fight with FBJ?