F-35 internal fuel, range

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

element1loop

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1406
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2015, 05:35
  • Location: Australia

Unread post21 Jan 2018, 03:47

Maybe this helps, from memory it was in LM's flight testing summaries section ... about mid to late 2016, if I remember correctly.

Edit

Just saw your reply spaz, close, not quite it, there was a later 5.6 hr and a few months later, a 5.7 hr test. Definitely a few years later than 2013.
Last edited by element1loop on 21 Jan 2018, 03:56, edited 1 time in total.
Accel + Alt + VLO + DAS + MDF + Radial Distance = LIFE . . . Always choose Stealth
Offline

alloycowboy

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 821
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2010, 08:28
  • Location: Canada

Unread post21 Jan 2018, 03:53

"Non optimized" meaning they were flying the F-35 at low altitude on deck where the fuel burn is high like it was a Eurofighter Typhoon or something. Instead of fly the F-35 at optimum altitude where the Prat and Whitney F-135 jet engine is the most efficient and relying on the Low Obeservable technology of the airframe to reduce radar return.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23923
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post21 Jan 2018, 03:53

element1loop wrote:Maybe this helps, from memory it was in LM's flight testing summaries section ... about mid to late 2016, if I remember correctly.

No worries - LOOK BACK AT EDIT on previous page - My method is to post then edit post edit at same place - bad - I know.

Repeated here because who looks back? Who reads articles? Questions Questions Questions....
"...25 February 2014: Longest Flights To Date
Two F-35 pilots broke the single flight F-35 duration record during the first AMRAAM launch at White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico. Air Force Maj. Mark Massaro flying BF-18 and Air Force Maj. Andrew Rollins flying AF-6 completed the round trip from Edwards AFB to the range in 5.7 hours. The previous duration record was 5.1 hours...."
http://www.codeonemagazine.com/article.html?item_id=136
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline
User avatar

element1loop

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1406
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2015, 05:35
  • Location: Australia

Unread post21 Jan 2018, 04:06

See my edit above spaz, cheers.
Accel + Alt + VLO + DAS + MDF + Radial Distance = LIFE . . . Always choose Stealth
Offline
User avatar

element1loop

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1406
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2015, 05:35
  • Location: Australia

Unread post21 Jan 2018, 04:21

spazsinbad wrote:
element1loop wrote:Maybe this helps, from memory it was in LM's flight testing summaries section ... about mid to late 2016, if I remember correctly.

No worries - LOOK BACK AT EDIT on previous page - My method is to post then edit post edit at same place - bad - I know.

Repeated here because who looks back? Who reads articles? Questions Questions Questions....
"...25 February 2014: Longest Flights To Date
Two F-35 pilots broke the single flight F-35 duration record during the first AMRAAM launch at White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico. Air Force Maj. Mark Massaro flying BF-18 and Air Force Maj. Andrew Rollins flying AF-6 completed the round trip from Edwards AFB to the range in 5.7 hours. The previous duration record was 5.1 hours...."
http://www.codeonemagazine.com/article.html?item_id=136



Awesome work! Thank you. :salute:
Accel + Alt + VLO + DAS + MDF + Radial Distance = LIFE . . . Always choose Stealth
Offline
User avatar

element1loop

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1406
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2015, 05:35
  • Location: Australia

Unread post21 Jan 2018, 04:31

However, there actually is a single aircraft flight test in about 2016 that made the 5.6 and 5.7 results. A formal test.
Accel + Alt + VLO + DAS + MDF + Radial Distance = LIFE . . . Always choose Stealth
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23923
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post21 Jan 2018, 04:35

That F-35 test is probably in the F-35 SAR report for that year (on later) - do we assume it is unrefueled/ARFed? Report could be in bigwig text submission to US Congress about F-35 progress? Dec 2015 SAR is here [they are dated weird]:

https://fas.org/man/eprint/F35-sar-2016.pdf (0.6Mb) ["As of FY 2017 President's Budget" BUT DEC 2015 - ffsake I give up]

There are other reports such as - DOT&E Annual Reports - that was what I was thinking might contain such information....
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline
User avatar

element1loop

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1406
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2015, 05:35
  • Location: Australia

Unread post21 Jan 2018, 04:49

spazsinbad wrote:That F-35 test is probably in the F-35 SAR report for that year (on later) - do we assume it is unrefueled/ARFed? Report could be in bigwig text submission to US Congress about F-35 progress? Dec 2015 SAR is here [they are dated weird]:

https://fas.org/man/eprint/F35-sar-2016.pdf (0.6Mb) ["As of FY 2017 President's Budget" BUT DEC 2015 - ffsake I give up]


I definitely read it on the LM site, in an LM article linked to a test summary. I have it ... But on a drive that died in April 2017. .... Doh!

Edit - unrefuelled endurance test, cross country, something like Seattle to a southern state. I remember it was not a direct track.
Accel + Alt + VLO + DAS + MDF + Radial Distance = LIFE . . . Always choose Stealth
Offline
User avatar

steve2267

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2484
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2016, 17:36

Unread post21 Jan 2018, 05:24

You are claiming, then, a max endurance fuel burn of 2800lb/hr when nominal cruise is on the order of 5000-5300lb/hr.
Take an F-16, stir in A-7, dollop of F-117, gob of F-22, dash of F/A-18, sprinkle with AV-8B, stir well + bake. Whaddya get? F-35.
Offline
User avatar

element1loop

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1406
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2015, 05:35
  • Location: Australia

Unread post21 Jan 2018, 06:12

steve2267 wrote:You are claiming, then, a max endurance fuel burn of 2800lb/hr when nominal cruise is on the order of 5000-5300lb/hr.


Now don't go being a schmartie, ask yourself, what exactly constitutes your pseudo-defined "nominal cruise" rate?

What weight?
What altitude?
What ISA conditions, at alt?
Most of all, EXACTLY what TAS?

You don't know.

Spurts can speak on those, and relate it to best endurance speed, and implicatons, if he wishes. Not me, I don't burrow that deep, and I'm absolutely sure that you don't.

I claim nothing, except the 5.7 hr unrefuelled endurance test result, sans condiions, sans best endurance speed, or track distance.

And nor are you, as you can't actually put subsubstance to what is this "nominal cruise speed" flow rate, and the conditions of it, let alone define how or why you adopted that nebulous fuel flow for it, that is little more than imaginitive invention.
Accel + Alt + VLO + DAS + MDF + Radial Distance = LIFE . . . Always choose Stealth
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23923
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post21 Jan 2018, 06:34

element1loop wrote:
spazsinbad wrote:That F-35 test is probably in the F-35 SAR report for that year (on later) - do we assume it is unrefueled/ARFed? Report could be in bigwig text submission to US Congress about F-35 progress? Dec 2015 SAR is here [they are dated weird]:

https://fas.org/man/eprint/F35-sar-2016.pdf (0.6Mb) ["As of FY 2017 President's Budget" BUT DEC 2015 - ffsake I give up]


I definitely read it on the LM site, in an LM article linked to a test summary. I have it ... But on a drive that died in April 2017. .... Doh!

Edit - unrefuelled endurance test, cross country, something like Seattle to a southern state. I remember it was not a direct track.

Vaguely (& I stress VAGUE) I recall some 'cross-country tests before the first Atlantic Crossing which did not happen because of the 'take-off fire at Eglin AFB' which was in 23 Jun 2014. Perhaps further flights cross-country done later?
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline
User avatar

Dragon029

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1360
  • Joined: 22 Dec 2014, 07:13

Unread post21 Jan 2018, 06:51

I don't believe that the 5.7 hour flight or such was unrefueled; we've heard here before that an F-35B burns about 85ppm at max endurance - even if we assume that could drop to 75ppm for the A model, that still leaves a max endurance of a little over 4 hours, with zero fuel reserve and assuming that the tanks are initially topped off at altitude.
Offline
User avatar

element1loop

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1406
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2015, 05:35
  • Location: Australia

Unread post21 Jan 2018, 07:07

spazsinbad wrote:
element1loop wrote:
spazsinbad wrote:That F-35 test is probably in the F-35 SAR report for that year (on later) - do we assume it is unrefueled/ARFed? Report could be in bigwig text submission to US Congress about F-35 progress? Dec 2015 SAR is here [they are dated weird]:

https://fas.org/man/eprint/F35-sar-2016.pdf (0.6Mb) ["As of FY 2017 President's Budget" BUT DEC 2015 - ffsake I give up]


I definitely read it on the LM site, in an LM article linked to a test summary. I have it ... But on a drive that died in April 2017. .... Doh!

Edit - unrefuelled endurance test, cross country, something like Seattle to a southern state. I remember it was not a direct track.

Vaguely (& I stress VAGUE) I recall some 'cross-country tests before the first Atlantic Crossing which did not happen because of the 'take-off fire at Eglin AFB' which was in 23 Jun 2014. Perhaps further flights cross-country done later?


I'll see if i can locate it this week, the tests happened, and were unrefueled endurance. I was quite astounded when I read it.
Accel + Alt + VLO + DAS + MDF + Radial Distance = LIFE . . . Always choose Stealth
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23923
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post21 Jan 2018, 07:20

How 'bout this one - but refueling....: viewtopic.php?f=22&t=28905&p=346380&hilit=Atlantic+test+endurance#p346380
"On June 29, 2016, a group of F-35Bs landed in the UK... [Royal Air Force Sqn Ldr Hugh Nichols, & USMC Col Richard Rusnok & Maj. Jack Cronan, all from VMFAT-501 at Marine Corps Air Station Beaufort, South Carolina] ...They also practiced their flight across the Atlantic Ocean through endurance flights of five hours, including a refueling exercise...." https://www.f35.com/in-depth/detail/beh ... -riat-2016
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline
User avatar

element1loop

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1406
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2015, 05:35
  • Location: Australia

Unread post21 Jan 2018, 07:30

Dragon029 wrote:I don't believe that the 5.7 hour flight or such was unrefueled; we've heard here before that an F-35B burns about 85ppm at max endurance - even if we assume that could drop to 75ppm for the A model, that still leaves a max endurance of a little over 4 hours, with zero fuel reserve and assuming that the tanks are initially topped off at altitude.


I would not be so sure dragon, that B may be describing the flow rate at indicated best endurance speed, but was the jet at the best specific fuel consumption altitude when doing it?

The difference between most efficient alt and conditions can be greater than 100% of that reported rate with a turbine.

Right?

I presume you are current or recent RAAF pilot. So is that not correct?

What I know is, what I read, as detailed above.

Now would formal testing not optimise all parameters and conditions for that 5.6 and 5.7? Is that what two tests are attempting to do?



I'll try to locate the page from my other 'puter during week, on phone now.
Accel + Alt + VLO + DAS + MDF + Radial Distance = LIFE . . . Always choose Stealth
PreviousNext

Return to General F-35 Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 37 guests