F-35A/C with 6 GBU-31's

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

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 20712
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post10 Jun 2018, 01:35

Attachments
F35 payload data 2012.gif
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline

elvis1

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 12
  • Joined: 05 Jun 2018, 01:51

Unread post10 Jun 2018, 03:11

I had actually done the search. I have been reading here long enough to know that Spaz would call me on it if I didn't :wink: . I also thought that the explanation from USNVO is the best that I had found.

I am guessing the difference between the 22,000 figure and the 18,000 figure is the difference between the CV/CTOL and the STOVL. The 1,000 lb difference on points 2, 4, 8 and 10 is the difference between 22,000 and 18,000. It would really be cool to see 5,000 lb GBU-28's instead of the fuel tanks--that would be a picture.

Will it actually be able to take off with this much weight? Taking the Max take-off weight (70k) minus the max fuel wt (18.5k) minus the empty weight (29k), I still come up with just over 22,000 lb for the "A". The "B" and "C" would have to sacrifice fuel to carry 18,000 and 22,000 lb--wondering if they can make up for this by just re-fueling right after take-off?? Can the the "C" "fill up" to over 70,000 lbs after take off? Either way, one could still take off with reduced fuel load and get a cool picture I am guessing.

Some of my confusion is around the desire to document much smaller loads than these with pictures / credible sources. . . . or being impressed with something that is much less impressive than what I believe will show up eventually on this . . . "beast".

I was really concerned about the investment in the F-35 before reading on this site--now I think it is the coolest thing ever.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 20712
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post10 Jun 2018, 04:25

Thanks for searching. Having been a pilot flying an aircraft of yore with a Maximum Take Off weight of 24,500 lbs I can sincerely state that ONLY ONCE did I personally approach that figure [you will have read my TA4G tanker story I guess]. Sure I was not in any war where this kind of WEAPON max load may have been carried in suitable circumstances ashore and even more suitable circumstances off our one and only steam catapult. BTW in nil wind on a tropical day (South China Sea) the A4G could be catapulted with longitudinal stress up to 9G. To my knowledge that was never asked of anyone but may have been tested by CHLOE (you can search on that). In my long winded way I'm suggesting that getting hung up on any MAXIMUM figure can be misleading. Over the life of the F-35 variants loads will vary while you and I will never know much more than that unless told with video/photo what the situation may be in the internal carriage. BELIEVE IT OR NOT. Aircraft will be kitted out with weapons required for the mission or alternate if there is a change mid-air. FUEL can always be guzzled from appropriate tankers when available. The numbers we see are the maximum allowed for the weapon stations, how weapon weight load adds up on these is a rubics cube of fantasmagorical complexity. I want the NATOPS manual. :mrgreen:
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 4205
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post10 Jun 2018, 22:31

wrightwing wrote:
Corsair1963 wrote:Does anybody have a source with a picture of a F-35A or C with six GBU-31's or another type 2,000 lbs class weapon??? (i.e. two internally and four externally)

:poke:


Any help would be much appreciated..... 8)

Out of curiosity, do you doubt the official pics. There aren't going to be any pics with the weapons bay doors open, and external weapons.


No, I don't doubt it for a second. As six JDAM's (2,000 lbs) plus the AMRAAMs and Sidewinders. Would be well within the Gross Weight even with a full internal fuel load. Yet, have come across some people that still doubt the F-35A/C could carry such a load????
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2723
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post11 Jun 2018, 20:58

Corsair1963 wrote:
wrightwing wrote:
Corsair1963 wrote:Does anybody have a source with a picture of a F-35A or C with six GBU-31's or another type 2,000 lbs class weapon??? (i.e. two internally and four externally)

:poke:


Any help would be much appreciated..... 8)

Out of curiosity, do you doubt the official pics. There aren't going to be any pics with the weapons bay doors open, and external weapons.


No, I don't doubt it for a second. As six JDAM's (2,000 lbs) plus the AMRAAMs and Sidewinders. Would be well within the Gross Weight even with a full internal fuel load. Yet, have come across some people that still doubt the F-35A/C could carry such a load????


It can carry an even bigger load. It could carry 2 GBU-31, 2 GBU-28, 2 AMRAAM, 2 AIM-9X, and if using TER ejectors 6 750lb bombs, plus a gun pod.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 4205
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post11 Jun 2018, 22:33

Honestly, the F-35's Payload vs Range compared to 4th Generation Types is truly impressive..... 8)
Offline

weasel1962

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 856
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore
  • Warnings: 3

Unread post15 Jun 2018, 03:06

elvis1 wrote:Will it actually be able to take off with this much weight? Taking the Max take-off weight (70k) minus the max fuel wt (18.5k) minus the empty weight (29k), I still come up with just over 22,000 lb for the "A". The "B" and "C" would have to sacrifice fuel to carry 18,000 and 22,000 lb--wondering if they can make up for this by just re-fueling right after take-off?? Can the the "C" "fill up" to over 70,000 lbs after take off? Either way, one could still take off with reduced fuel load and get a cool picture I am guessing.


The max take off weight is roughly 1.5-1.7x afterburner thrust. 70+k is what current F-35A/Cs can achieve.

The max take off weight is lower for the B in STO mode. If conventional take off, the F-35 should be able to max its 66k payload.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 20712
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post20 Jun 2018, 14:59

AY CARAMBA! This one has been in me face for a donkey age: https://www.f35.com/in-depth/detail/pre ... -at-a-time
"An F-35A flies the first external GBU-31, 2,000 pound Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) in a loads/flutter test flight at Edwards AFB, California." https://a855196877272cb14560-2a4fa819a6 ... __main.jpg (25Kb Low quality)
Attachments
F-35A+4xGBU-31sExternalInverted.jpg
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: Google Adsense [Bot], mrigdon and 13 guests