F-35B at Miramar 30 July

Discuss the F-35 Lightning II
Elite 3K
Elite 3K
 
Posts: 3901
Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

by quicksilver » 01 Aug 2013, 02:44



User avatar
Elite 5K
Elite 5K
 
Posts: 28404
Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
Location: Australia

by spazsinbad » 01 Aug 2013, 07:08

Interesting to see the dismount/mount procedure in this video.


User avatar
Elite 3K
Elite 3K
 
Posts: 3300
Joined: 10 Mar 2012, 15:38

by count_to_10 » 01 Aug 2013, 23:25

Do they usually make banking turns that close to the runway?
The AOA at touchdown was pretty high, too.
Einstein got it backward: one cannot prevent a war without preparing for it.

Uncertainty: Learn it, love it, live it.


User avatar
Elite 5K
Elite 5K
 
Posts: 28404
Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
Location: Australia

by spazsinbad » 01 Aug 2013, 23:30

That would be a quick tight circuit - showing the pilot skill and aircraft to best advantage to then do 'aero-braking' rather than flare touchdown on three wheels to wear out the wheel brakes (or make them hot unnecessarily) on a long runway I presume. I'll guess the FBC will not allow too high an angle of attack before / during touchdown so as to prevent a tail strike (even if that is possible) while the high angle of attack allows the nose to be kept UP during touchdown and rollout (without braking otherwise). F-35As will do this as a matter of course whilst the Bs and Cs will do it when long runways allow (same as As but they usually will operate from long suitable runways).

Don't forget to go to full screen for the video of said F-35B first landing MCAS Miramar.
Attachments

F-35B Lands at MCAS Miramar.wmv [ 3.69 MiB | Viewed 14952 times ]

F-35B Lands at MCAS Miramar AeroBrakeTD.png


User avatar
Elite 5K
Elite 5K
 
Posts: 28404
Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
Location: Australia

by spazsinbad » 01 Aug 2013, 23:58

Here is an informative aerobrake post by 'johnwill':

"There is a "maximum design landing weight" for AF airplanes, but it is a misleading criterion. AF fighters commonly are designed for 10 ft/sec landing at "maximum design landing weight", which is normally substantially less than max takeoff weight, whatever the AF decides is appropriate. For example, early F-16s had a max takeoff weight of 33,000 lb (quickly raised to 35,400 lb) and a max design landing weight of 27,500 lb. The misleading part of "maximum design landing weight" is that there is also a requirement for 6 ft/sec landing for all takeoff weights, including MDTOW. Those 10 and 6 ft/sec landing requirements were applied to the F-16, but I don't know the F-35A requirements.

Based on watching hundreds of test flight landings, almost all are around 1 or 2 ft/sec, so heavy landings are, as you say, no worries, well almost.

The biggest problem with heavy landings is not gear strength, but brake energy limits. So with a heavy landing, aero braking is often employed to reduce brake energy requirements."

http://www.f-16.net/index.php?name=PNph ... ing#231685


Elite 1K
Elite 1K
 
Posts: 1748
Joined: 28 Feb 2008, 02:33

by outlaw162 » 02 Aug 2013, 00:23

The real question is why would anyone go into Miramar on a Tuesday instead of a Wednesday?

I would think an F-35 patch would be worth more than gold at the club.

:D



Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests