Forum: F-35 Lightning II

Lockheed has responded to questions about aerial refueling from Norwegian and Canadian sources - both of whom are in line to buy F-35A CTOL aircraft. The questions concern these nations not having boom refueling technology, only Probe & Drogue.

Lockheed has replied they always anticipated this and that the F-35A, while they all come equipped with a boom receptacle, they can also have the option of adding an F-35B/C Probe into the nose of the F-35A aircraft.

What weight penalty will this impose on the aircraft? This weight will either reduce fuel or weapons so it is important.

Lockheed also responded to questions about landing/takeoff on remote northern airstrips (6000ft) in both countries and said there was no problem. Have they published landing/takeoff runway requirements at various weights?

F-16.net Sponsor

The probe should weigh in the 1-200 lbs range. Since the aircraft rarely takeoff at MTOW, this will not be an issue.

IIRC takeoff lengths at various loads is still classified.

Short runways? Go STOVL. Very Happy

SpudmanWP wrote:

The probe should weigh in the 1-200 lbs range. Since the aircraft rarely takeoff at MTOW, this will not be an issue.

Do you know of any legacy aircraft equipped with dual aerial refueling systems?

I'd think for smaller air forces it would be a handy capability when working with other nations in training or Ops.

luke_sandoz wrote:

Do you know of any legacy aircraft equipped with dual aerial refueling systems?

I'd think for smaller air forces it would be a handy capability when working with other nations in training or Ops.

F-105 and F-101 were dual refuelable.

I may not be up-to-date on this but I don't think Norway has any aerial refueling capability and is totaly dependant on other nations to supply this when needed. Perhaps the new C-130J's just delieved can take on the role with the right wing pylons?

Lockheed came up with a Probe that fits into the right-hand CFT for the F-16. It was part of the F-16I bid in the MMRCA competition.

http://www.codeonemagazine.com/article.html?item_id=56

Any hint that there is a Buddy Tank being developed that would allow an F-35 to be the tanker?

Any hint that someone, probably Israel, developing conformal tanks for an F-35?

A NON-stealthy buddy tanker package would be easy enough to develop AFAIK.

Cobham Mission Equipment for Air to Air Refuelling:

http://www.cobham.com/media/77351/303 - cobham enables f-35b aerial refueling.pdf (all one URL)
OR
http://alturl.com/gi8bp
_____________________

Good historic pics here for Air Refuellers:

http://airrefuelingarchive.wordpress.com/

skicountry wrote:

luke_sandoz wrote:

Do you know of any legacy aircraft equipped with dual aerial refueling systems?

I'd think for smaller air forces it would be a handy capability when working with other nations in training or Ops.

F-105 and F-101 were dual refuelable.

I believe Britain's E-3Ds are dual refuelable.

SpudmanWP wrote:

Lockheed came up with a Probe that fits into the right-hand CFT for the F-16. It was part of the F-16I bid in the MMRCA competition.

http://www.codeonemagazine.com/article.html?item_id=56

OMG, a compass rose! LOL
OK, back to topic.
fisk

Go tell the Marines....

Commandant maps out future Corps By Gidget Fuentes - Staff writer : Wednesday Feb 9, 2011

http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/20 ... ps-020911/

"...Having a STOVL jet will enable the Marine Corps to support more ground forces because it will be able to operate from more places, he said, noting that “around the globe, there are 10 times as many 3,000-foot runways capable of handling the STOVL (F-35B)” as 8,000-foot runways for conventional jets."

spazsinbad wrote:

A NON-stealthy buddy tanker package would be easy enough to develop AFAIK.

Cobham Mission Equipment for Air to Air Refuelling:

http://www.cobham.com/media/77351/303 - cobham enables f-35b aerial refueling.pdf (all one URL)
OR
http://alturl.com/gi8bp
_____________________

Good historic pics here for Air Refuellers:

http://airrefuelingarchive.wordpress.com/

You know they're taking about offload from a kc-130 right?

That being said, it wouldn't be much to come up with a system and that would go a lot easier if they would make the center pylon wet on production aircraft.

spazsinbad wrote:

Go tell the Marines....

Commandant maps out future Corps By Gidget Fuentes - Staff writer : Wednesday Feb 9, 2011

http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/20 ... ps-020911/

"...Having a STOVL jet will enable the Marine Corps to support more ground forces because it will be able to operate from more places, he said, noting that “around the globe, there are 10 times as many 3,000-foot runways capable of handling the STOVL (F-35B)” as 8,000-foot runways for conventional jets."

The problem is supplying those 3000ft runways. The F-35B can't do much of anything without fuel and munitions.

bjr1028: Sorry to have not spelt out what I meant by using COBHAM as an example of how a buddy tanker system COULD be developed by that company. Here is an example page: http://www.cobham.com/about-cobham/miss ... lling.aspx

BUDDY STORES are what we speak of: (but then I don't expect you to follow any links or discover for yourself)
http://www.cobham.com/about-cobham/miss ... pment.aspx

"Buddy Stores
Cobham is the world leader in buddy-store technology. The buddy store is a combination external fuel tank and hose reel mounted on tactical aircraft. The 31-301 buddy store is used extensively by the U.S. Navy, converting the S-3 and F/A-18E/F into tactical tankers. The 31-301 is also being considered for a similar role on the Joint Strike Fighter Aircraft.

As for your usual complaint about supplying a forward deployed F-35B then you have not read how the USMC can use their flat tops offshore for such resupply until those forward supplies organised - or depleted - going back and forth. The big advantage being the other side will not know when and where they will appear next on even much shorter runways. But you knew that. Look forward to your usual one liner response. Very Happy

An aerodynamic comparison of F-35 variants from April 2003 PDF: (0.8Mb)

http://www.aoe.vt.edu/~mason/Mason_f/F35EvanS03.pdf

F-35: A case study Eugene Heim, Leifur Thor Leifsson, Evan Neblett
AOE 4124 - Configuration Aerodynamics - Virginia Tech

Forum: F-35 Lightning II

F-35 Aerial Refuelling and landing/take off questions