F-35B LOADed Graphic STOVL Mode

http://maquettegarden.free.fr/news/Kitt ... 35-b1d.jpg

Pretty much a SRVL configuration.

i dont think it can hover with that much weapons

'eloise' posted as I typed.... Hover no - SRVL depends 'Probably' a bit heavy for that hovering - the SRVL supposedly gives an extra 2K to 4K pounds extra landing weight on top of the full internal load (with fuel reserves for a VL etc.). Depends how much dem bombs weigh etc AND... what the final story is about the extra brungback SRVL gives. I guess.

I think Kitty Hawk is a brand of Chinese scale model maker. So could this be a possible scale model of the F-35B of Kitty Hawk? In any case, nice drawing though.

Also noticed the canopy is open. Is this to assist in throwing you wallet .....

"...Also noticed the canopy is open. Is this to assist in throwing you wallet." And increases airflow to the hyperventilating pilot (concerned about the configuration).

Assuming a 30K empty weight that only leaves 10K in excess thrust. About 2K for external racks, Aim-9s, and -120s leaves 8K worth of bombs at the most.

WHAT?????

No Gun Pod?

'snakewhisperer' WotNo Fuel? Guys gotta land ya'know.

'snakewhisperer' WotNo Fuel? Guys gotta land ya'know.

Hey, I once landed at LAX (original destination March AFB) with fuel in the pipes after a Pacific crossing with chicks. Fuel is overrated, you don't need much. ... Hmm actually thinking back now that I remember that ...yeah maybe a little fuel for landing is a good plan ...

BP

'snakewhisperer' WotNo Fuel? Guys gotta land ya'know.

With an empty weight of 29.1K-ish I allowed for 900 pounds at landing.

With an empty weight of 29.1K-ish I allowed for 900 pounds at landing.

The empty for the B isn't

Some 'facts' are known but even those in dispute. I prefer to use weights and measures from LM Fast Facts PDF and work from there: https://www.f35.com/assets/uploads/down ... 3q2015.pdf

The reason why SRVL bring back extra weight is variable is because of the variable way the WOD, sea state and other variables including potential bringback weight impact the way the SRVL is calculated. I can only point to how that is calculated without having access to the figures and of course this is under test and won't be verified until UK F-35B test ops from actual CVF sometime in 2018. And SRVLs may never be carried out for whatever reason.

The unknowns will include the amount of fuel required for minimum to land on with in VL/SRVL circumstances. This is a bunch of words without numbers so one has to guess.

There is a thread with the 'quicksilver' comment about the video of USMC F-35Bs FCLPing in 90deg F heat at YUMA telling the LSO in effect they will have approx. 6,500lbs of fuel in the hover. Now they could have more than that also because we do not know if these Bees have carried out a VL already - guessing is a fun game. I await the F-35B NATOPS with interest.

For VL: "3,000 lbs of weapons + STOVL Bringback fuel (sufficient for 2 x IFR passes with STOVL reserve)"
http://dodreports.com/pdf/ada520417.pdf

Also the BOWMAN PDF has similar info about what to have for a VL: http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_download-id-14791.html

'snakewhisperer' WotNo Fuel? Guys gotta land ya'know.

Hey, I once landed at LAX (original destination March AFB) with fuel in the pipes after a Pacific crossing with chicks. Fuel is overrated, you don't need much. ... Hmm actually thinking back now that I remember that ...yeah maybe a little fuel for landing is a good plan ...

BP

Can the airliners even land in the runway length they have without their thrust reversers?

Can the airliners even land in the runway length they have without their thrust reversers?

Yes, those are mainly to preserve brakes and tires.