F-35 Aerial Refuelling and landing/take off questions

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

luke_sandoz

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 498
  • Joined: 08 Feb 2011, 20:25

Unread post08 Feb 2011, 20:27

Lockheed has responded to questions about aerial refueling from Norwegian and Canadian sources - both of whom are in line to buy F-35A CTOL aircraft. The questions concern these nations not having boom refueling technology, only Probe & Drogue.

Lockheed has replied they always anticipated this and that the F-35A, while they all come equipped with a boom receptacle, they can also have the option of adding an F-35B/C Probe into the nose of the F-35A aircraft.

What weight penalty will this impose on the aircraft? This weight will either reduce fuel or weapons so it is important.

Lockheed also responded to questions about landing/takeoff on remote northern airstrips (6000ft) in both countries and said there was no problem. Have they published landing/takeoff runway requirements at various weights?
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8379
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post08 Feb 2011, 20:46

The probe should weigh in the 1-200 lbs range. Since the aircraft rarely takeoff at MTOW, this will not be an issue.

IIRC takeoff lengths at various loads is still classified.
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23079
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post08 Feb 2011, 21:28

Short runways? Go STOVL. :D
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline

luke_sandoz

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 498
  • Joined: 08 Feb 2011, 20:25

Unread post09 Feb 2011, 18:40

SpudmanWP wrote:The probe should weigh in the 1-200 lbs range. Since the aircraft rarely takeoff at MTOW, this will not be an issue.



Do you know of any legacy aircraft equipped with dual aerial refueling systems?

I'd think for smaller air forces it would be a handy capability when working with other nations in training or Ops.
Offline

skicountry

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 110
  • Joined: 21 Jan 2009, 17:12

Unread post09 Feb 2011, 18:55

luke_sandoz wrote: Do you know of any legacy aircraft equipped with dual aerial refueling systems?

I'd think for smaller air forces it would be a handy capability when working with other nations in training or Ops.


F-105 and F-101 were dual refuelable.
Offline
User avatar

lamoey

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1061
  • Joined: 25 Apr 2004, 17:44
  • Location: 77550

Unread post09 Feb 2011, 20:00

I may not be up-to-date on this but I don't think Norway has any aerial refueling capability and is totaly dependant on other nations to supply this when needed. Perhaps the new C-130J's just delieved can take on the role with the right wing pylons?
Former Flight Control Technican - We keep'em flying
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8379
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post09 Feb 2011, 22:16

Lockheed came up with a Probe that fits into the right-hand CFT for the F-16. It was part of the F-16I bid in the MMRCA competition.

http://www.codeonemagazine.com/article.html?item_id=56
Image
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

luke_sandoz

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 498
  • Joined: 08 Feb 2011, 20:25

Unread post09 Feb 2011, 23:32

Any hint that there is a Buddy Tank being developed that would allow an F-35 to be the tanker?

Any hint that someone, probably Israel, developing conformal tanks for an F-35?
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23079
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post10 Feb 2011, 00:05

A NON-stealthy buddy tanker package would be easy enough to develop AFAIK.

Cobham Mission Equipment for Air to Air Refuelling:

http://www.cobham.com/media/77351/303 - cobham enables f-35b aerial refueling.pdf (all one URL)
OR
http://alturl.com/gi8bp
_____________________

Good historic pics here for Air Refuellers:

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

aaam

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 866
  • Joined: 21 Aug 2010, 22:52

Unread post10 Feb 2011, 02:12

skicountry wrote:
luke_sandoz wrote: Do you know of any legacy aircraft equipped with dual aerial refueling systems?

I'd think for smaller air forces it would be a handy capability when working with other nations in training or Ops.


F-105 and F-101 were dual refuelable.


I believe Britain's E-3Ds are dual refuelable.
Offline

fiskerwad

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 753
  • Joined: 13 Nov 2004, 19:43
  • Location: 76101

Unread post10 Feb 2011, 02:35

SpudmanWP wrote:Lockheed came up with a Probe that fits into the right-hand CFT for the F-16. It was part of the F-16I bid in the MMRCA competition.

http://www.codeonemagazine.com/article.html?item_id=56
Image


OMG, a compass rose! LOL
OK, back to topic.
fisk
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23079
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post10 Feb 2011, 12:56

Go tell the Marines....

Commandant maps out future Corps By Gidget Fuentes - Staff writer : Wednesday Feb 9, 2011

http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/20 ... ps-020911/

"...Having a STOVL jet will enable the Marine Corps to support more ground forces because it will be able to operate from more places, he said, noting that “around the globe, there are 10 times as many 3,000-foot runways capable of handling the STOVL (F-35B)” as 8,000-foot runways for conventional jets."
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline

bjr1028

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 516
  • Joined: 07 Jul 2009, 03:34
  • Location: Dubuque, IA

Unread post10 Feb 2011, 15:52

spazsinbad wrote:A NON-stealthy buddy tanker package would be easy enough to develop AFAIK.

Cobham Mission Equipment for Air to Air Refuelling:

http://www.cobham.com/media/77351/303 - cobham enables f-35b aerial refueling.pdf (all one URL)
OR
http://alturl.com/gi8bp
_____________________

Good historic pics here for Air Refuellers:

http://airrefuelingarchive.wordpress.com/


You know they're taking about offload from a kc-130 right?

That being said, it wouldn't be much to come up with a system and that would go a lot easier if they would make the center pylon wet on production aircraft.

spazsinbad wrote:Go tell the Marines....

Commandant maps out future Corps By Gidget Fuentes - Staff writer : Wednesday Feb 9, 2011

http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/20 ... ps-020911/

"...Having a STOVL jet will enable the Marine Corps to support more ground forces because it will be able to operate from more places, he said, noting that “around the globe, there are 10 times as many 3,000-foot runways capable of handling the STOVL (F-35B)” as 8,000-foot runways for conventional jets."


The problem is supplying those 3000ft runways. The F-35B can't do much of anything without fuel and munitions.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23079
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post10 Feb 2011, 17:42

bjr1028: Sorry to have not spelt out what I meant by using COBHAM as an example of how a buddy tanker system COULD be developed by that company. Here is an example page: http://www.cobham.com/about-cobham/miss ... lling.aspx

BUDDY STORES are what we speak of: (but then I don't expect you to follow any links or discover for yourself)
http://www.cobham.com/about-cobham/miss ... pment.aspx

"Buddy Stores
Cobham is the world leader in buddy-store technology. The buddy store is a combination external fuel tank and hose reel mounted on tactical aircraft. The 31-301 buddy store is used extensively by the U.S. Navy, converting the S-3 and F/A-18E/F into tactical tankers. The 31-301 is also being considered for a similar role on the Joint Strike Fighter Aircraft.

As for your usual complaint about supplying a forward deployed F-35B then you have not read how the USMC can use their flat tops offshore for such resupply until those forward supplies organised - or depleted - going back and forth. The big advantage being the other side will not know when and where they will appear next on even much shorter runways. But you knew that. Look forward to your usual one liner response. :D
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23079
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post13 Feb 2011, 00:57

An aerodynamic comparison of F-35 variants from April 2003 PDF: (0.8Mb)

http://www.aoe.vt.edu/~mason/Mason_f/F35EvanS03.pdf

F-35: A case study Eugene Heim, Leifur Thor Leifsson, Evan Neblett
AOE 4124 - Configuration Aerodynamics - Virginia Tech
Attachments
F-35variantAeroComparo.gif
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/

Return to General F-35 Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests