F-35C drop testing picture

apparently this was the F-35C undergoing Drop Testing

Thought I'd Share

http://air-attack.com/news/article/4083 ... sting.html

Great picture. I wish they would post a video of that drop. I've seen carrier landing videos but it's seems like it would be odd to see a huge fighter like that lifted by a crane and just dropped.

Also, I hadn't noticed before that the F-35C has two wheels in the front. I missed that on the other pictures for some reason.

wolfsith, thanks for that info.

dragorv, the Hornet (amongst other USN aircraft tested) was dropped from a similar height for testing. I'll see if I can make a video clip later.

Here is the video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h6BsCvDg ... tube_gdata

That's pretty cool. Thanks!

((I'll self-berate myself for not using "search" ))

cywolf32, Ditto - what dragorv said (saves me having to find similar Hornet drop test video).

No problem. Glad to help. I love this stuff just as much. The link above actually has another link at the bottom for it, but it turned out to be a promo video for LM. Just did a little follow up to get the right link. Will be even better when they get to actual STOBAR ops.

cywolf32, you are meaning CATOBAR (for F-35C)? Catapult Assisted Take Off but Arrested Recovery not Short Take Off.... I see these terms bandied around incorrectly a lot and it can be confusing if reverse is meant in a discussion but I digress... Only the Ruskies do STOBAR at moment? Maybe they do it seldom; also with India & China maybe catching up one day soonish using STOBAR.

dragorv wrote:Great picture. I wish they would post a video of that drop. I've seen carrier landing videos but it's seems like it would be odd to see a huge fighter like that lifted by a crane and just dropped.

Also, I hadn't noticed before that the F-35C has two wheels in the front. I missed that on the other pictures for some reason.

Single front wheeled carrier aircraft went out with the bridles. All aircraft with towbars are dual front wheel.

You are correct Spaz! Sorry for that. I just tend to categorize it since it is a "short takeoff" for both. Thanks for the correction.

Great stuff! Though unfortunatly i'm quite sure it won't take more than a day, perhaps less of this news circulating the intertubes till some wannabe expert declares it to be an epic failure. I can see it now:

"Look at it bounce, the bounce man! Dude that thing is all over the place and could never land on a carrier, to stay polite" etc etc repaet ad nauseum...

cywolf32, I struggle with these acronyms (preferring to think of just conventional NavAv as we see in USN or HairierAv as we see in RN/USMC). Please be the first to invent a suitable acronym of this new potential Russian Carrier upgrade which MAY have the 'jump de ski' and some form of (probably waist) catapult mechanisms:

Moscow set to upgrade Admiral Kuznetsov aircraft carrier 06/04/2010

http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20100406/158454665.html

"The Fleet Admiral of the Soviet Union Kuznetsov, currently the only aircraft carrier serving as the flagship of the Russian Navy, will be upgraded, the media reported, quoting Navy sources. The aircraft carrier, due to enter a dry dock in 2012, will be re-launched in 2017.

Originally laid as the Leonid Brezhnev in 1982, launched as the Riga in 1985 and renamed as the Tbilisi in 1987, the warship received her current name in 1990. Western analysts call her a ship of a thousand names.

The Admiral Kuznetsov entered service with the Russian Navy in 1991 and was used for the operation of deck aircraft, the development of new tactics, including those for dealing with carriers of theoretical enemies.

In the late 1990s and the early 2000s, it was repeatedly proposed that the Admiral Kuznetsov, which remained moored for long time periods, be decommissioned and sold for scrap.

However, an improved situation in the country gave the ship a new lease of life. Her propulsion unit and other equipment were repaired, and she started taking part in various high seas war games more often.

In the mid-2000s, Navy representatives and Russian political leaders once again started speaking of the need to build aircraft carriers for the Navy. Moscow decided to preserve the Admiral Kuznetsov, used to train deck aircraft pilots.

The upcoming large-scale modernization was motivated by the need to eliminate the ship's inherent drawbacks and to repair some of her units. Plans for docking the ship in 2010-2012 were discussed more frequently and have now been confirmed.

Although it is hard to assess the revamped carrier's specifications, her future appearance can be predicted on the basis of available reports.

First of all, the defective propulsion unit comprising steam turbines and turbo-pressurized boilers will be replaced either with a gas-turbine or nuclear propulsion unit.

The ship's 3M45 P-700 Granit (SS-N-19 Shipwreck) anti-ship cruise-missile launchers will be dismantled, and her internal layout changed. Consequently, the hangar area will be expanded to 4,500-5,000 sq. m. for storing additional fixed-wing aircraft.

The Admiral Kuznetsov's air defenses will be strengthened by replacing 3K95 Kinzhal (SA-N-9 Gauntlet) missiles with a multi-role naval system featuring 80-120 new-generation and medium-range surface-to-air missiles (SAMs).

Moreover, 4-6 Pantsir-S1 (SA-22 Greyhound) combined short to medium-range SAM and anti-aircraft artillery weapons systems will be installed.

The new weapons systems will feature state-of-the-art radio-electronic equipment, probably including the standard Sigma combat information and control system, due to be installed on all new generation Russian warships. The system facilitates unprecedentedly effective cooperation between task force elements.

The carrier will also receive aircraft catapults, a logical option. Considering the fact that her ski-jump will remain intact, one or two catapults can be located on the angled flight deck.

A similar engineering solution was envisioned for the incomplete Ulyanovsk super-carrier, whose keel was laid down in 1988, but the project was cancelled when it was 40% complete along with a sister ship in 1991 after the end of the Cold War.

By that time, the Soviet Union had developed steam catapults and tested an experimental version at the ground-based NITKA training facility incorporating a ski-jump and deck arrestor. Consequently, this task is feasible.

The choice of catapults is linked with the choice of the ship's propulsion unit. Steam catapults require a nuclear propulsion unit, while a gas turbine propulsion unit leaves no choice but electromagnetic catapults. Moscow will either have to develop such catapults independently or buy them abroad, or ... copy them illegally.

The carrier's air wing is to comprise 26 new Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-29K Fulcrum-D multi-role fighter aircraft, helicopters and navalized Sukhoi T-50 PAK FA (Future Frontline Aircraft System) fifth-generation fighters, currently under development. It appears that 15-20 of these aircraft will be built pending the ship's re-launching, which is likely to take place in 2020 rather than 2017.

The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.

MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti military commentator Ilya Kramnik)"

Need to adjust compression damping to match the nose, as mains bounced and nose didn’t?

F-35 has long legs and suspension adjustment should be easy!
You know rookie semen/gals are going to hit the deck harder than that!

Ya, I know she isn’t a YFZ 450, but my

VarkVet: from the website info I would guess that "CG-1,was dropped 95 inches at 20 feet per second, with an 8.8-degree pitch, 2-degree roll, and 133-knot wheel speed, simulating a carrier-deck landing." the roll would cause most issues seen in that one particular clip. During arrest the nose takes the weight much more than mainmounts during arrest phase (but that is a generalisation not specific to JSF-C I guess). Bearing in mind that ideally the mainmounts take the initial actual landing shock load.

For some aircraft a hard carrier arrested landing could be literally back breaking for the pilot if the nosewheel came up through the fuselage or worse. The venerable Cutlass was notorious for this problem (and one of the reasons why it did not last long in USN service). Even a bad arrested landing (usually by a student) could break the Skyhawk nosewheel. My point being that the nosewheel needs to be rugged and not just for the catshot. Have a look at some slow motion arrested landings to see what is going on during them.

Ideally at optimum angle of attack (perhaps the 8.8 degree pitch is a clue to what it is but not stated) the hook touches down first to grab the no.3 wire as the mainmounts follow milliseconds later with the nosewheel next to take the weight going forward during the arrest.

About time the F-35C testing made it's way into the schedule (or at least John Q. Taxpayer is told some of what goes on). I'm certain that if the F/A-18A prototypes could pass muster in these drop tests the Lightning II certainly can! Just my humble, uninformed opinion, my Thanks very much for the photo and the link wolfsith!