F-35 losses only small amount of altitude in pedal turn
- Elite 1K
- Posts: 1047
- Joined: 17 Oct 2010, 19:10
Official F-35 demo maneuver description can be downloaded here:
viewtopic.php?f=22&t=57350
The F-35 loses only 1250-1500 feet in the 360 deg pedal turn. considering it "delivers a constant 28 deg/sec",
https://www.realcleardefense.com/articl ... 673-7.html F-35 only loses 100 feet/sec to maintain 28deg/sec. By contrast, 4th gen fighters lose hundreds of feet/sec to maintain 25 deg /sec. This could be verified with doghouse plots of F14/F16.
The F-35 carries huge amount of fuel when taking off at an airshow: full fuel for staged show, 14500+ lbs for high show and 12000+ lbs for low show.
The F-35 enters the min radius turn at about 380 knots and may still accelerate under 7.5G pull. Throttle needs regulate to maintain speed.
viewtopic.php?f=22&t=57350
The F-35 loses only 1250-1500 feet in the 360 deg pedal turn. considering it "delivers a constant 28 deg/sec",
https://www.realcleardefense.com/articl ... 673-7.html F-35 only loses 100 feet/sec to maintain 28deg/sec. By contrast, 4th gen fighters lose hundreds of feet/sec to maintain 25 deg /sec. This could be verified with doghouse plots of F14/F16.
The F-35 carries huge amount of fuel when taking off at an airshow: full fuel for staged show, 14500+ lbs for high show and 12000+ lbs for low show.
The F-35 enters the min radius turn at about 380 knots and may still accelerate under 7.5G pull. Throttle needs regulate to maintain speed.
- Elite 5K
- Posts: 5319
- Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
- Location: Parts Unknown
It's good to know it can do these things with max internal fuel (or damn close), but I wonder why they don't use less as I'd imagine it would present a better safety margin?
I don't mean fumes, just something that'll buy it more "umph" if the situation calls for it. I've seen some pretty close calls with the ground (coming out of a loop, for example) in other aircraft. Have to believe the amount of fuel they were carrying didn't at least play a part. Makes me wonder how much fuel that Flanker had when it tumbled into the crowd years back.
Terrible day for aviation..
I don't mean fumes, just something that'll buy it more "umph" if the situation calls for it. I've seen some pretty close calls with the ground (coming out of a loop, for example) in other aircraft. Have to believe the amount of fuel they were carrying didn't at least play a part. Makes me wonder how much fuel that Flanker had when it tumbled into the crowd years back.
Terrible day for aviation..
- Elite 1K
- Posts: 1066
- Joined: 27 Apr 2007, 07:23
mixelflick wrote:It's good to know it can do these things with max internal fuel (or damn close), but I wonder why they don't use less as I'd imagine it would present a better safety margin?
I don't mean fumes, just something that'll buy it more "umph" if the situation calls for it. I've seen some pretty close calls with the ground (coming out of a loop, for example) in other aircraft. Have to believe the amount of fuel they were carrying didn't at least play a part. Makes me wonder how much fuel that Flanker had when it tumbled into the crowd years back.
Terrible day for aviation..
Due to cooling requirements, perhaps?
- Elite 1K
- Posts: 1047
- Joined: 17 Oct 2010, 19:10
mixelflick wrote:It's good to know it can do these things with max internal fuel (or damn close), but I wonder why they don't use less as I'd imagine it would present a better safety margin?
I don't mean fumes, just something that'll buy it more "umph" if the situation calls for it. I've seen some pretty close calls with the ground (coming out of a loop, for example) in other aircraft. Have to believe the amount of fuel they were carrying didn't at least play a part. Makes me wonder how much fuel that Flanker had when it tumbled into the crowd years back.
Terrible day for aviation..
Quote from the text:
Fuel load consideration includes divert requirements.
4 posts
|Page 1 of 1
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 7 guests