Possibility small STOVL carrier USN/USMC

Discuss the F-35 Lightning II
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23558
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post26 Apr 2011, 14:06

In the spirit of SVRL for F-35B here is the story (incomplete) about the 'running, jumping & standing still' OSPREY MV-22B: [Another good PDF: www.g2mil.com/TRAAC_Shipboard_OPS.pdf]

MV-22B OSPREY SHORT TAKEOFF AND MINIMUM RUN-ON LANDING TESTS ABOARD LHD CLASS SHIPS

http://www.vtol.org/f65_bestPapers/test ... uation.pdf (1.2Mb)

ABSTRACT
This paper describes recent ship suitability tests conducted by the V-22 Test Team in March 2008 aboard USS IWO JIMA (LHD 7). This testing encompassed expanding the Short Takeoff (STO) envelopes and developing a new landing technique termed Minimum Run-on Landing (MROL) to extend V-22 shipboard capability beyond Vertical Takeoff and Landing (VTOL) gross weights (GW)....
&
CONCLUDING REMARKS
This paper has provided an overview of the test methodology used in order to conduct V-22 sea trials in support of increased shipboard STO capabilities for the fleet [3]. The objectives of this test were partially met. The STO GW envelope was expanded, although not to the fullest extent of the aircraft capability due to insufficient time at-sea. MROL demonstrated to be a revolutionary and safe way to land aboard ship at GWs heavier than VTOL capability and will continue to be developed and tested. An MROL envelope was not recommended due to insufficient test data; however when more can be gathered, the possibility of granting an envelope to the fleet exists...."
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline

1st503rdsgt

Banned

  • Posts: 1547
  • Joined: 23 Jan 2011, 01:23

Unread post27 Apr 2011, 00:47

Spaz,

The document you posted on that other thread made me think. Instead of building new LHAs or modifying those existing for F-35B/V-22 operations, might it be possible to turn over 1 or 2 older CVNs to the Marines as the Ford class comes online? These ships are expensive to operate, but removing the catapult and arresting gear could reduce some of those costs, and the ships already have ample volume to use in a support capacity (though they lack well decks). In any case, it couldn't hurt to see whether it's possible to extend the useful life of these older ships by converting them to the STOVL "LHN" role. :idea: :?:
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23558
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post27 Apr 2011, 00:54

Rumours I see online suggest the old oil fuelled CVs are rusty hulks - really at the end of their useful lives. Perhaps the USS Enterprise could be such a model for 'conversion' in the future. It also is at the end of life. It may be used for trials for example much the same way old CVs were used decades ago to trial the USMC early Harriers:

AV-8A Harrier Tests (Not an USN view point probably - probably USMC - Go USMC!]

http://ussfranklindroosevelt.com/?page_id=2264

"Her final cruise, which concluded on 21 April 1977, included the embarkation of AV-8A Harriers of Marine Attack Squadron (VMA) 231, the historic “Ace of Spades” squadron, marking the first deployment of Vertical Short Take Off and Landing aircraft on board a U.S. Navy aircraft carrier."
&
"From June 1976 to April 1977, VMA-231 deployed with 14 AV-8As aboard the USS Franklin D. Roosevelt (CV-42). This deployment demonstrated that the Harrier could be completely integrated into normal CV air operations. Almost every conceivable takeoff and recovery option was flown: upwind, downwind, crosswind, and before, during, and after re-spots. The Harrier demonstrated not only that VSTOL operations could be conducted within the rigid framework of cyclic operations, but that because of VSTOL’s inherent flexibility, a carrier can launch and recover at any time and steam wherever desired while achieving a combat capability that does not exist when using only conventional aircraft. A STOVL jet is unrestrained by launch/recovery times and mission permitting, could fill in gaps created by the CV cycle. On 13 January 1977, two other Harriers made bow-on approaches and landing aboard the carrier, marking the first time a fixed wing aircraft had made a bow-on, downwind landing aboard a carrier at sea."

US Marines eye UK JSF shipborne technique DATE:15/06/07 SOURCE:Flight International

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/20 ... nique.html

"A shipborne rolling vertical landing (SRVL) technique being developed by the UK for the Lockheed Martin F-35B is being eyed by the US Marine Corps as a way to facilitate operation of short take-off and vertical landing (STOVL) Joint Strike Fighters from US Navy aircraft carriers.

The F-35B is scheduled to replace USMC Boeing F/A-18s and concerns have arisen that integration of the STOVL JSF with conventional US Navy fighters will disrupt carrier landing operations.

The F-35B lacks a hook and will have to approach the ship, hover and land vertically, potentially slowing deck operations.
The rolling vertical landing technique is being developed to increase the F-35B's bringback payload when operating from the UK's planned CVF large-deck carriers.

An SRVL approach exploits the ability of the STOVL JSF to use vectored thrust to slow the aircraft while retaining the benefit of wingborne lift.

For the USMC, the technique would allow a conventional approach to a short landing on the carrier and could ease integration of the F-35B with US Navy F/A-18E/Fs." [or JSF-Cs]
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline

1st503rdsgt

Banned

  • Posts: 1547
  • Joined: 23 Jan 2011, 01:23

Unread post27 Apr 2011, 01:11

spazsinbad wrote:Rumours I see online suggest the old oil fuelled CVs are rusty hulks - really at the end of their useful lives. Perhaps the USS Enterprise could be such a model for 'conversion' in the future. It also is at the end of life. It may be used for trials for example much the same way old CVs were used decades ago to trial the USMC early Harriers:


That's the rub. A great deal would depend on when the ship was last refueled and how deteriorated the hull is. The Big E also has some design quirks and is a good deal older than the other CVNs (about 14 years). I was thinking of the older Nimitz carriers, but it's still a rather crazy idea. I just wonder if any feasibility studies have been done.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23558
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post27 Apr 2011, 01:44

ENTERPRISE has just been refuelled and due for paying off in a year or so (depends on a lot of things now to do with US Budget I guess). Similar to the ROOSEVELT testing years ago, it makes sense to at least have the aircraft mixed for a short time to see what happens (perhaps on ENTERPRISE). Who knows.

LHA testing of the B model later this year will mean a lot for any other testing; with current testing at PAX River ongoing. Early days eh.
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline

bjr1028

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 518
  • Joined: 07 Jul 2009, 03:34
  • Location: Dubuque, IA

Unread post27 Apr 2011, 21:09

spazsinbad wrote:In the spirit of SVRL for F-35B here is the story (incomplete) about the 'running, jumping & standing still' OSPREY MV-22B: [Another good PDF: www.g2mil.com/TRAAC_Shipboard_OPS.pdf]

MV-22B OSPREY SHORT TAKEOFF AND MINIMUM RUN-ON LANDING TESTS ABOARD LHD CLASS SHIPS

http://www.vtol.org/f65_bestPapers/test ... uation.pdf (1.2Mb)

ABSTRACT
This paper describes recent ship suitability tests conducted by the V-22 Test Team in March 2008 aboard USS IWO JIMA (LHD 7). This testing encompassed expanding the Short Takeoff (STO) envelopes and developing a new landing technique termed Minimum Run-on Landing (MROL) to extend V-22 shipboard capability beyond Vertical Takeoff and Landing (VTOL) gross weights (GW)....
&
CONCLUDING REMARKS
This paper has provided an overview of the test methodology used in order to conduct V-22 sea trials in support of increased shipboard STO capabilities for the fleet [3]. The objectives of this test were partially met. The STO GW envelope was expanded, although not to the fullest extent of the aircraft capability due to insufficient time at-sea. MROL demonstrated to be a revolutionary and safe way to land aboard ship at GWs heavier than VTOL capability and will continue to be developed and tested. An MROL envelope was not recommended due to insufficient test data; however when more can be gathered, the possibility of granting an envelope to the fleet exists...."


Definitely something that will be put into practice as the Osprey assumes the COD role.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23558
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post01 May 2011, 04:30

Corrosion Prevention & Control S&T
Mega Rust Conference 2010 - 08 June 2010
Airan J. Perez - Office of Naval Research

http://www.mcwl.usmc.mil/docs/EW10_Seabasing_Web.pdf (3.5Mb)

Extract of five pages attached which deals with the planned? F-35B (& C?) 'High Performance Non Skid Coatings' deck paint called THERMION - Aluminum Ceramic Thermal Spray (TH604). Other deleted pages are about ship below waterline issues and the like.

Thermion me up Scottie! :D
Attachments
Thermion_F-35B_from_11-Lemieux.pdf
(965.44 KiB) Downloaded 1044 times
Last edited by spazsinbad on 01 May 2011, 22:33, edited 2 times in total.
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23558
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post01 May 2011, 10:37

Centerfield Short Take Off/Vertical Landing (STOVL)

http://www.navair.navy.mil/nawcad/index ... 38819A5C10

"The Centerfield STOVL (Short Takeoff/Vertical Landing) was completed in 2009, to support the developmental testing of the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) F-35B STOVL aircraft. Located in the centerfield area at NAS Patuxent River, the STOVL Centerfield Facility consists of an AM-2 Expeditionary Airfield (EAF), an AM-2 Vertical Takeoff and Landing (VTOL) pad within a painted LHD deck outline, a Ski Jump, and a grated Hover Pit.

The EAF and VTOL Pad AM-2 surfaces are representative of current US Marine Corps austere/forward deployed basing capabilities. These surfaces will be used to test F-35B compatibility during Short Takeoff (STO), Vertical Landing (VL), and Slow Landing (SL).

The Ski Jump, built to match the profile of the UK HMS Invincible Class Ships, will provide a land-based test site for unique ship compatibility. The Hover Pit was constructed during the X-32/X-35 concept demonstration phase of the JSF Program and has supported operations with British Sea Harrier aircraft.

The Hover Pit also provides a means to perform STOVL mode engine runs without ground effects by ducting exhaust thrust away from the aircraft through a series of vanes below the top grating of the pit."

http://www.navair.navy.mil/nawcad/img/u ... 0Site1.jpg

Image
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline
User avatar

neptune

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2885
  • Joined: 24 Oct 2008, 00:03
  • Location: Houston

Unread post02 May 2011, 04:46

[quote="spazsinbad"]...The F-35B is scheduled to replace USMC Boeing F/A-18s ..quote]

Not to nitpick but....USMC flys 8 sqds with about 96 Harriers vs. 14 sqds. with about 168 Hornets; and we now know that both the F35-B/C will be flown by the USMC. 8)

I'm not trying to detract from the thread about the SRVL. Good post :) , just a point of clarification. All Marines aren't on PO-GO sticks! :lol:
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23558
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post02 May 2011, 05:32

neptune that quote (not mine above) was from the middle of 2007 in FrightGlobularInterStellar. :D There will now be a lot of 'outdated' info on a lot of things on the web. Here is a nice quote probably worth repeating here:

Lockheed Martin rebuts F-35 critics on cost, progress By: Chris Pocock July 19, 2010

F-35B Sets STOVL Milestones

“When asked how the F-35B compared to the Harrier in terms of ease of takeoff/landing, Tomlinson replied:

“It’s chalk and cheese–and so it should be!

This is a single-button operation with no special controls–much easier than the Harrier. For short takeoffs you just power up; the system takes care of everything else. On the ski-jump, for instance, the system detects the change in deck angle and doesn’t apply any rotation as it would on a flat deck.

http://www.ainonline.com/news/single-ne ... ess-25359/
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline

aaam

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 902
  • Joined: 21 Aug 2010, 22:52

Unread post02 May 2011, 21:45

spazsinbad wrote:ENTERPRISE has just been refuelled and due for paying off in a year or so (depends on a lot of things now to do with US Budget I guess). Similar to the ROOSEVELT testing years ago, it makes sense to at least have the aircraft mixed for a short time to see what happens (perhaps on ENTERPRISE). Who knows.

LHA testing of the B model later this year will mean a lot for any other testing; with current testing at PAX River ongoing. Early days eh.


ENTERPRISE is being retired a few years early as part of the defense drawdown. She was originally supposed to stay in service until the FORD replaced her.
Offline

aaam

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 902
  • Joined: 21 Aug 2010, 22:52

Unread post02 May 2011, 21:59

1st503rdsgt wrote:Spaz,

The document you posted on that other thread made me think. Instead of building new LHAs or modifying those existing for F-35B/V-22 operations, might it be possible to turn over 1 or 2 older CVNs to the Marines as the Ford class comes online? These ships are expensive to operate, but removing the catapult and arresting gear could reduce some of those costs, and the ships already have ample volume to use in a support capacity (though they lack well decks). In any case, it couldn't hurt to see whether it's possible to extend the useful life of these older ships by converting them to the STOVL "LHN" role. :idea: :?:


What generally determines a NIMITZ class ship's life is her refueling. When you buy the ship, you're also bought 23 years worth of fuel, and at the refueling you've bought another 23 years or so. So, to take a NIMITZ at the end of her fuel would require an incredible expense to extend her life. Since the Administration has slowed carrier construction to the point where new ones will not be coming online as fast as the existing ones approach the end of their 2nd "load" of fuel, it's not likely the USN would be willing to give up some of the remaining years.
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7707
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post03 May 2011, 03:09

F-35Bs and V-22s playing together .. nice!

http://www.sldinfo.com/?p=17319

Gamechanger : The Evolving Amphibious Ready Group

An Interview With General “Dog” Davis



Flight deck crew members prepare an MV-22 Osprey with Marine Medium Tiltrotor Squadron 266, 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit, for take off during flight operations aboard USS Kearsarge, April 23, 2010 (Credit: 26th MEU)



05/02/2011 – Recently, Second Line of Defense looked at the role of the ARG and the evolution of the ARG in the years ahead. A key point was that the newly empowered ARG with an Osprey, F-35B, and CH-53K helo would become a gamechanger. The flexibility of the ARG was laid out by the former 15th MEU commander, “Ozzie” Osborn. The evolving role of the ARG was discussed by Vince Martinez. The USMC planning for a newly configured ARG was discussed by Ed Timperlake. And the capabilities of the newly empowered ARG was introduced by Robbin Laird. We argued that “[the] force can of course secure an airfield for humanitarian airlift; the picket fence of the F-35s replace the AWACs and can guide coalition airpower into Libyan airspace to support agreed upon missions. The USAF does not need to move a large air operation into place to send combat air; the USN does not need to move a large aircraft carrier battle group into place to prepare to strike Libya.

What the newly equipped ARG does is provide a significant shaping function for the President. And this shaping function allows significant flexibility and, is in fact, a redefinition of the dichotomy between hard and soft power. The USN-USMC amphibious team can provide for a wide-range of options for the President simply by being offshore, with 5th generation aircraft capability on board which provides 360 situational awareness, deep visibility over the air and ground space, and carrying significant capability on board to empower a full spectrum force as needed.”...........
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23558
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post05 May 2011, 04:23

Ideas in this now ten your old PDF are not going to be put into practice any time soon. However they may become relevant if/when the US Budget necessitates some scaling down of capacity for new flat decks of any variety. Already new L ships have not been made with these ideas expressed here in mind (ski jumps and angled deck). Anyhoo...

Marine TACAIR and the STOVL Penalty: Myth or Menace MAJOR JOHN O. JORDAN, U.S.M.C. 12 Apr 2001

http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?Lo ... =ADA401159 (124Kb)

"Abstract
The goals of the STOVL Program, which include basing flexibility, mission effectiveness, and
survivability, can be met by means that (1) Do not require STOVL Capable Aircraft, (2) Exist within the
current capabilities of military aviation, and (3) Surpass the capabilities of STOVL. Conventional land and
carrier based aircraft have demonstrated the capability to function better than STOVL Aircraft from Sea
and from forward deployed sites in combat. Simple, relatively inexpensive gear such as Ski-Ramps and
Arresting Gear can further enhance the capability of conventional aircraft at a cost that is potentially less
than developing and maintaining STOVL."

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Title: Marine TacAir and the STOVL Penalty: Myth or Menace?
Author: Major John O. Jordan, United States Marine Corps
[b]Thesis:
The goals of the STOVL program, which include basing flexibility, mission
effectiveness, and survivability, can be met by various means that (1) do not require
STOVL capable aircraft, (2) exist within the current capabilities of military aviation, and
(3) surpass the capabilities of STOVL.

Discussion: The Harrier program was originally designed to fill a need within the Marine
Corps for a TacAir platform capable of operating from a large variety of sites, both on
land and at sea. In addition, the aircraft needed to be survivable, supportable,
maintainable, and capable of generating sorties at a rapid rate in support of the Marines
on the ground. Historically, the STOVL program has faced many difficulties, as
witnessed by the safety, survivability, and warfighting capability of the Harrier. The
aftermath of the Harrier program has left many wondering about the utility of any
STOVL program. As the Harrier Review Panel (HaRP) said, the AV-8B is a singleengine
aircraft that is challenging to fly, difficult to maintain, a low priority within the
Department of the Navy, and lags other aircraft in warfighting capabilities. Marine Corps
decision-makers look to the Joint Strike Fighter to alleviate the shortcomings of the
Harrier program, and to make Marine Aviation the all-STOVL force that our 21st
Commandant had envisioned.

The JSF program was designed as a means of streamlining the acquisition,
development, production, and support process within the military aviation services. The
main goal of the program is to cut costs within the process, primarily by maintaining a
high degree of commonality in an aircraft that will meet the needs of the Air Force, the
Marines, and the Navy. The Marine Corps has stated a need for a STOVL version of the
JSF as a replacement to the AV-8B and the F/A-18. Designers from Boeing and
Lockheed Martin have attempted to answer the questions of the HaRP, but the evidence
suggests that the STOVL JSF will still suffer some consequences of its design that will
not be common to the other two JSF variants.

Conventional land and carrier based aircraft have demonstrated the capability to
function better than the Harrier, from the sea and from forward deployed sites in combat.
Simple, relatively inexpensive gear such as ski-ramps and arresting gear can further
enhance the capability of conventional aircraft at a cost far less than developing and
maintaining STOVL. The Harrier’s trump card is its ability to operate from amphibious
shipping.

Recommendations: True warfighting flexibility can only be attained by enabling all of
the TacAir assets in both the Navy and Marine Corps to operate from very short runways
and L-class ships. By modifying amphibious shipping to accommodate the carrier based
JSF, the Navy-Marine team can employ not only the very few fixed wing assets of the
MEU, but in fact all of the tactical air power of the Carrier Battle Group in the littorals
where the carrier cannot go. This can all be achieved with today’s technology and at less
expense than developing a third, unique version of the JSF."
_______________________

On one of the last pages there is this statement which is just wrong: "Additionally, requiring an aircraft to land vertically consumes fuel that would otherwise translate into increased combat radius." At least the RN FAA Harriers came back with minimum fuel to land first time/every time successfully. Why not USMC? See below. I suspect the Major above is not a Harrier pilot? Only my guess.

Navy argues against Marine variant of JSF - Corps defends JFF STOVL against assertions outlined in document
By Christopher P. Cavas Apr 30, 2007:

http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/20 ... f_070430m/

“USN [statement] * Carry only 70 percent as much fuel as the F-35C.

Marines [answer]: That advantage will be reduced by the F-35C’s heavier weight, by the -B’s ability to fly from forward bases, and by the fact that the STOVL version doesn’t need to carry backup fuel in case it can’t trap aboard a carrier.
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23558
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post09 May 2011, 18:48

First landing of a Harrier in the Juan Carlos I [Spanish LHD same as Oz LHDs x 2 soon] 04 of May of 2011

http://au.babelfish.yahoo.com/translate ... =Translate

Translation from Spanish to English by BabelFish:
The cover of `Juan Carlos I' received for the first time the taking of an airplane “Harrier” AV8B Extra of the Ninth Squadron of Airships of the Navy. To 19:51 h. of Monday 2 of May the first taking of an airplane was realised successfully in the cover of `Juan Carlos I', `Cobra 23 ', piloted by lieutenant commander Manuel Rodriguez Giner.

The LHD of the Spanish Navy, that is realising its cruise of resistance, in which the necessary operations of flight for the Sea and air Certification are framed, on board takes Unidad Aérea Embarcada (UNAEMB) composed by three helicopters of 5ª and 6ª Squadrons and an airplane “Harrier” AV-8B Extra. The ship carries, in addition, a compound landing party percent navy infants, vehicles of the Third of Navy, as well as two amphibious assault aircrafts LCM-1E of the Naval landing party.

The successful landing marks a new landmark in the process of Sea and air Certification of the Juan Carlos I, whose first taking of helicopters it took place 8 of February on the part of lieutenant commander Emilio the past Medina Flour mill, Head of 5ª Squadron, who took in spot 3 of the cover to the controls of WALRUS 08 (SH-3D “Seaking”). This first taking, Squadron followed others of helicopters of 6ª (Hughes 500) and of 3ª Escuadrilla (AB-212). The flight deck of the LHD “Juan Carlos I” has been designed to operate, to send, to receive and to support, as much by day as at night, to airplanes and helicopters like the AB-212, SH-3D, and the airplanes AV-8B Harrier II Extra, that are modernizing by the Spanish Navy through the EADS branch, Cassidian, in San Pablo (Seville).

The conversion to version AV-8B Extra implies the installation of a new motor Rolls Royce Pegasus 408A, the implementation of improvements in the structure and the positioning systems and communications and in the main systems of avionics."

http://www.defensa.com/images/stories/n ... arrier.jpg

Image

And that SKI JUMP!: http://www.defensa.com/images/stories/noticias/harr.jpg

Image
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
PreviousNext

Return to General F-35 Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests