F-35 and Airshows

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

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 20975
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post02 Oct 2017, 06:13

Forgot that this compound video - starting at 2min 48sec has 2 F-35C T&G howls onboard - music by IRON BUTTERFLY.
https://youtu.be/ffynvYi0b9o?t=170 :devil: IN A GADDA DA VIDA 1968 FFsake 50 years ago :doh: 17 minutes of ??????? :mrgreen:



:devil: THE FULL BOTTLE in an F-35 related video - demos of MartinBaker ejection seat in slomo for seventeen minutes. :doh:

RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline
User avatar

steve2267

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1571
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2016, 17:36

Unread post02 Oct 2017, 15:38

sferrin wrote:Well then you'll like this one (go to 0:53 - and that's all dry power):



OMG - the nose shock compression at 1:31 at brake release. Quick, someone call Dr. D*ckhead (aka Gilmore)... gotta fix the engine -- it's too powerful, -- or mebbe the brakes... someone gonna hurt their neck at STO brake release! [/sarc=off]

That was an impressive STO.
Take an F-16, stir in A-7, add dollop of F-117 & gob of F-22, sprinkle with AV-8B, stir well, then bake. Whaddya get? An F-35.
Offline
User avatar

doge

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 126
  • Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 16:07

Unread post08 Oct 2017, 14:50

That photos is the London AirShow F-35C. :D
London AirShow F-35C-1.jpg
London AirShow F-35C-2.jpg
London AirShow F-35C-3.jpg
London AirShow F-35C-4.jpg
Offline
User avatar

white_lightning35

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 353
  • Joined: 18 Sep 2016, 03:07
  • Location: Home of nuclear submarines, engines, and that's about it.

Unread post08 Oct 2017, 16:17

I like the look of the C variant a lot. I can't help but feel that it seems like it will a little sluggish. Those new engines can't come soon enough.
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2791
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post09 Oct 2017, 00:11

white_lightning35 wrote:I like the look of the C variant a lot. I can't help but feel that it seems like it will a little sluggish. Those new engines can't come soon enough.

Well, more thrust is always nice, but the C can fly >M1.1 with 6 2000lb JDAMs, 2 AIM-120, and 2 AIM-9X. I think it's gonna be a lot zippier than you might think.
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3477
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az

Unread post09 Oct 2017, 13:25

The four externals were 1,000lb GBU-32s in that photo.
"Spurts"

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2264
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post09 Oct 2017, 15:51

Love the C's look, if not its acceleration :(

I mean c'mon.... relax the standard some 45 seconds? Or did I not hear correctly??
Offline
User avatar

steve2267

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1571
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2016, 17:36

Unread post09 Oct 2017, 16:57

mixelflick wrote:Love the C's look, if not its acceleration :(

I mean c'mon.... relax the standard some 45 seconds? Or did I not hear correctly??


Hey, it is what it is. Not even the F-35 can rescind the laws of Newton et al. The Navy had other requirements -- e.g. landing speed etc. When you make the wing that much larger, and the other control surfaces relatively larger as well... drag is going to increase. I suppose the Navy could have said... you know what... we really want that 45 seconds back on the acceleration spec... Let's make the internal weapons bays smaller to save weight and drag... the Corps got it right... we only need to haul 1000lb bombs internally.

Personally, I think all the requirements caught up to the Navy. Something had to give. They chose to "relax" the acceleration requirement.

On the other hand, Billie Flynn has been quoted as saying he loves the way the "C" turns... "like carving on a snowboard" or something like that. (Hey may even have said he loves the "C" the best, but I can't recall exactly.)

ETA: my google-fu is strong this morning, here's the quote:

Billie Flynn twittered:

Raging pulling G out over Atlantic Ocean in CF-5. Love this jet...flies like a kite and turns like a snowboard in deep powder snow.

Source: https://twitter.com/billieflynn/status/ ... 0411800576


Mebbe raw acceleration isn't everything...
Take an F-16, stir in A-7, add dollop of F-117 & gob of F-22, sprinkle with AV-8B, stir well, then bake. Whaddya get? An F-35.
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3477
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az

Unread post09 Oct 2017, 18:50

Hahaha, what's the 0.8M-1.2M acceleration time for an F/A-18E with two AAMs and two BGU-31s with a TGP adn the fuel to carry that 600+nm? What's its top speed in that config? Haw many G can it pull in that config?

The C is not the A, and it does not need to be.
"Spurts"

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2791
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post09 Oct 2017, 19:10

sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:The four externals were 1,000lb GBU-32s in that photo.

Are you absolutely certain about that? I'm looking at pics of the externals compared with pics of 2000lb internals, and it's not as obvious. They look like GBU-31s.
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2791
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post09 Oct 2017, 19:11

sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:Hahaha, what's the 0.8M-1.2M acceleration time for an F/A-18E with two AAMs and two BGU-31s with a TGP adn the fuel to carry that 600+nm? What's its top speed in that config? Haw many G can it pull in that config?

The C is not the A, and it does not need to be.

Yeah, comparing a clean aircraft, with a combat loaded aircraft is hardly apples to apples.
Offline
User avatar

Dragon029

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1240
  • Joined: 22 Dec 2014, 07:13

Unread post09 Oct 2017, 19:14

wrightwing wrote:
sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:The four externals were 1,000lb GBU-32s in that photo.

Are you absolutely certain about that? I'm looking at pics of the externals compared with pics of 2000lb internals, and it's not as obvious. They look like GBU-31s.

In the video, where the F-35C Mach >1 with external load image originates, the Lockheed pilot explicitly states they're GBU-32s / 1000lb-ers.
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2791
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post09 Oct 2017, 21:40

I realize that, and also realize that there was some discussion about whether he mispoke, regarding 32 vs 31. Visually it looks like a 31.
Offline
User avatar

steve2267

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1571
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2016, 17:36

Unread post11 Oct 2017, 20:27

It would be cool to see an F-35B fly a Paris-type display eventually, but starting and ending with a vertical takeoff / landing. I should think that party trick should be doable with 7000lb of gas. Some routines could start with a STO, others with a VT just for grins -- a repositioning flight, as it were.
Take an F-16, stir in A-7, add dollop of F-117 & gob of F-22, sprinkle with AV-8B, stir well, then bake. Whaddya get? An F-35.
Offline
User avatar

mas

Banned

  • Posts: 344
  • Joined: 31 Aug 2017, 13:16

Unread post12 Oct 2017, 01:10

What I like about the F-35 high AoA maneuvers is how it still has good momentum and energy after when doing them. The TVC jets may be sharper, quicker and more pronounced in their direction change but they sacrifice airspeed in doing so coming to virtual complete stops in most cases. The F-35s AOA capability looks more safer to use in actual general combat to me. In the hands of a good pilot who fully understands the airframe I don't see the F-35 at a dogfighting disadvantage even against nominally better turning aircraft as it can use its high energy pointing ability to counteract this.
PreviousNext

Return to General F-35 Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: hornetfinn and 8 guests