F-35 go past Mach 1 with full external load.

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

steve2267

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1039
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2016, 17:36

Unread post11 Nov 2017, 03:51

Look... if it can haul that load AND bust the barrier on military power only... there must really be some Area 51 secret sauce in there and so I really think Xwing applies. :drool: And from certain angles, the nose / forward fuselage is highly reminiscent of Mr. Lucas' creation. :poke:

But I guess that's a different thread... :doh:
Take an F-16, stir in a little A-7, bake, then sprinkle on a generous helping of F-117. What do you get? An F-35.
Offline
User avatar

KamenRiderBlade

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2557
  • Joined: 24 Nov 2012, 02:20
  • Location: USA

Unread post11 Nov 2017, 04:21

What's the max speed that the Hornet / Super Hornet can do with the same weapons load?
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 19222
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post11 Nov 2017, 04:23

This catapult shot looks to be at NOT full burner but others may know details: https://www.flickr.com/photos/lockheedm ... 5/sizes/o/ THEN going to full burner at end of shot as per automatic engine controls for full A/B catapulting: [initial A/B on catapult is much less 25% due issues then by end of the stroke the engine is in full A/B - designed into FCU from Shornet experience - which is similar ie. 25% A/B to FULL at end] https://www.flickr.com/photos/lockheedm ... 438420763/

Then 3rd shot shows full A/B about half way down stroke as per text description so the first photo is a TEST remember at a lesser A/B setting OR.... just at military power? But I think it is just a test a lesser A/B setting catapult. We see lots of just mil power catapult pics - nothing to see.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/lockheedm ... 438420763/
https://farm1.staticflickr.com/671/2198 ... b6_o_d.jpg

35C Development Test III
An F-35C Lightning II takes off from USS George Washington (CVN-73) during F-35C Development Test III. Lockheed Martin photo by Dane Wiedmann 15 Aug 2016"


Anyway in the photo under discussion on previous pages this thread I reckon those petal thingies are open so that indicates some kind of burner is in use. I'll attach last photo of F-35C catapulting just in mil power for comparison.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/lockheedm ... 438420763/
https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5624/219 ... ce_o_d.jpg
Attachments
29049699715_aee4e75ed5_o.jpg
F-35CburnerCatapult2016zoom.jpg
28743748420_7e8e52f7ef_o.jpg
F-35CgoingFullBurnerAfterCatShotZOOM.jpg
21980228011_0c41e97a84_k.jpg
21958314832_24b5248d79_k.jpg
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline

munny

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 629
  • Joined: 13 Jan 2010, 01:39

Unread post11 Nov 2017, 08:24

What's the max speed of an F-15E with 4 MK-82s and 2 MK-81s attached? If the F-35 can do M1+ with 4 on the wings, it can also do it with 6 and less fuel.
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1921
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post11 Nov 2017, 12:51

steve2267 wrote:
spazsinbad wrote:Just watched the video (provided by 'Dragon029' on previous page this thread). There is no mention of the power, so far in this thread only one comment about 'not being on A/B' is from 'kimjongnumbaun' & I don't get it either. Why invent stuff?



From the video to which you linked Spaz, the LM test pilots says "and the vapes are there because we're breaking the sound barrier... Mach 1+"... but it seems self evident from the photo in the video, that the afterburner ain't burnin'. So perhaps that is to what kingjong refers?


A good observation. But, we know nothing about the flight condition when the pic was snapped
(downhill, downhill by how much, min ab, etc etc?).

What we do know is that the jet will not attain supersonic speed in level flight in any configuration -- in mil. Thus, dont connect the two (the observation and the statement). As discussed above, Brick also misstated the weapons load. (OMG a test pilot got something wrong... :doh:)
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1921
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post11 Nov 2017, 12:58

"Then 3rd shot shows full A/B about half way down stroke as per text description so the first photo is a TEST remember at a lesser A/B setting OR.... just at military power? But I think it is just a test a lesser A/B setting catapult. We see lots of just mil power catapult pics - nothing to see."

Some cat shots use 'ab lim' -- a feature whereby the ab comes on progressively down the cat shot.
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1921
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post11 Nov 2017, 13:05

KamenRiderBlade wrote:What's the max speed that the Hornet / Super Hornet can do with the same weapons load?


One has to be very specific about aircraft configuration. Does "weapons load" include a similar fuel load? That would require some number of tanks. Does it require that same type of sensors? That would require a t-pod...and so on.

By the book, a Hornet would be slightly better than a Super, but both would be greatly challenged to get to the number.
Offline

citanon

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 183
  • Joined: 01 Jul 2015, 21:42

Unread post11 Nov 2017, 14:00

Another explanation is that the picture was taken when A/B was turned off but the plane had not yet decelerated to below Mach 1?
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 19222
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post11 Nov 2017, 15:06

quicksilver wrote:"Then 3rd shot shows full A/B about half way down stroke as per text description so the first photo is a TEST remember at a lesser A/B setting OR.... just at military power? But I think it is just a test a lesser A/B setting catapult. We see lots of just mil power catapult pics - nothing to see."

Some cat shots use 'ab lim' -- a feature whereby the ab comes on progressively down the cat shot.

An ordinary F-35C catapult shot (not a test shot) in A/B is always limited AFAIK. This was explained years ago now with reference to the Super Hornet experience which also is limited until down the cat track so that full A/B reached at the end of the stroke (or halfway down - can't remember exactly in reference to the F-35C). This reduced A/B is for eliminating engine pop stalls (with secondary effect of less heat impinging on the JBD).

Is there an F-35C 'ab lim' which not only limits the 'before' A/B (approx. 25% AFAIK) but during and after the cat shot to a specific LIMITED A/B setting? Which I guess would be one of the four (with four available) A/B settings?

Here is a forum link to the article quote with the full article in PDF format attached (no longer available at original URL).

viewtopic.php?f=56&t=52566&p=358064&hilit=2011+07+18_JBD_Testing.pdf+Butler#p358064

F-35C JBD Test & Pop Stall Limited AB Catapult Butler 2011 pp2.pdf
1.3Mb PDF of the article (in PDF format originally also): download/file.php?id=23956



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

Return to General F-35 Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests