US F-35B Lightning (Video)

Discussion in 'Aviation' started by Trip_Wire, Feb 23, 2008.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Trip_Wire

    Trip_Wire RIP

  2. Nice.

    Why do Yanks always refer to the Harrier as the "British Harrier"? I was under the impression the modern American designed and built harriers were very different to the British Harriers and SHars.
     
  3. You should be glad that they're giving credit to somebody else for once and are not saying that it was Bruce Willis who stole the designs from the Germans in Vietnam. :wink:

    You're right that the Harrier II was chiefly a McDD deisgn, but it's important to remember that the whole aircraft, like its predecessor, is built around the Bristol/Rolls Royce Pegasus. It provides the oomph to required to get the aircraft airborne and the means of control (through the RCS) at slow speeds and in the hover- something the F-35 prototypes are having real problems with, IIRC due to it being fatter and lazier than a 400lb Walmart shopper on a Disneyland Dragster.
     
  4. Why didn't we just update Harrier and re-run a production line to modernise the existing V/STOL aircraft instead of getting an expensive, and still to be tested STOVL aircraft?
     
  5. Trip_Wire

    Trip_Wire RIP

    As usual crabtastic has nothing good to say about the US and/or it's technology. Or very little else American for that matter.

    Of course, I'm not a Crab, so perhaps he knows more about this fighter "having having real problems with, IIRC and/or being in his words " due to it being fatter and lazier than a 400lb Walmart shopper on a Disneyland Dragster."

    The video that I posted seems to disprove, such an analogy and a quick google search fails to come up with anything like that except for an engine failure on an initial test.

    I also find it hard to believe that the USAF, US Navy, USMC and the RAF would be ordering an aircraft that is compared to a "400 lb. Walmart shopper on a Disneyland Dragster." But what do I know? I'm only a former Infantry type.

    Some Interesting reading along with the failed engine report."

    F-35 tests shouldn't be delayed, Lockheed official says

    Initial flight tests of the second F-35 joint strike fighter should not be delayed much despite the failure of an engine during tests earlier this week, a senior Lockheed Martin official said Friday.

    If all goes well, the F-35B Lightning II aircraft – the first capable of short takeoffs and vertical landings (STOVL) – should begin conventional flights before the end of June, close to the original schedule.

    After extensive discussions with Pratt & Whitney and Pentagon officials this week, Dan Crowley, Lockheed executive vice president for the F-35, said program managers don’t believe the engine problem will cause serious delays in the overall flight testing schedule.

    Link:

    http://www.star-telegram.com/business/story/463056.html

    Other Links:

    http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/jsf/

    http://www.deagel.com/Strike-and-Fighter-Aircraft/F-35B-Lightning-II_a000547003.aspx
     
  6. The RAF are not ordering the F35b they are ordering the JSF (different aircraft) along with other fcukers in europe.
    I know this because me old dear works for rolls royce, who are building the engine.
     


  7. The F35 is the Joint Strike Fighter, its called that as its a joint venture between nations. The engines are being made in partnership with General Electrics (GE) and Rolls Royce.

    We used to call it the 'Joint Strike Fighter' but then the aircraft was given the designation 'F35' and we now call it this, there are 3 variants, the F35A which is the conventional aircraft, the F35B which is the STOVL and the F35C which is the Carrier Variant.
     
  8. Trip_Wire

    Trip_Wire RIP


    Ok! Perhaps our resident know-it-all CRAB can enlighten us on this. :roll:

    How about the Royal Navy? The one article mentions them, as ordering them.
     
  9. I can start with teaching you the difference between "know" and "no", you dull cnut. After that, I can tell you the difference that an "X" and and "F" designation makes on US aircraft.

    Once you have the basics of the alphabet and the English language down, maybe then someone will see fit to point out the difference between a technology demonstrator and an operational aircraft and what's required and what happens when you try to turn one into the other.
     

  10. The F35B are the ones the RN are looking at, i just know basic info about this stuff from mates in those areas, but then again everything is up in the air just now with the trimming of projects and reductions in project sizes!
     
  11. Trip_Wire

    Trip_Wire RIP

    Ok, please show me where I misused the word 'know' where I should have used 'no,' Mister KNOW-it-all! I'll correct it ASAP! :p

    Great! It's fixed, I missed that one, but used it other places right, perhaps, I was in to much of a hurry! :wink:

    Dealing with Know it alls.: :lol:

    http://www.hypnosisdownloads.com/downloads/difficult-people/know-all.html
     
  12. Right there, in bold type, Fuckwit.
     
  13. Besides, I'm knocking an Anglo-American project and anyone who has spent any time looking at the procurement processes of both countries militaries should know that it is quite easy (albeit for different reasons) for them to end up with the equivalent of a 400lb Walmart shopper. In the case of the RAF Trade Group 18, this can be interpreted quite literally as most blanket stackers are, in fact, 400lb Walmart shoppers.

    Edit: For other shining examples of the British military procurement system, see here: http://www.arrse.co.uk/wiki/British_Military_Procurement_Mysteries.

    For good American examples, check out: http://www.arrse.co.uk/wiki/American_Military_procurement_mysteries Alternatively the flightline at Whiteman AFB, MO or the scrap metal bin at Andersen AFB, Guam might throw up a clue or two.
     
  14. Trip_Wire

    Trip_Wire RIP

    crabtastic:

    So, I made a small mistake, on one word! It was used correctly other places I think you knew very well what was meant, as well as who it was meant for.

    The sad part of this is, why do you have to turn a post, showing a successful flight of an American aircraft, into a criticism of American aviation in general and this aircraft in particular, as well as turn the thread into another slagging match between us. I really see no reason to do this.

    Have poor opinions of the aircraft? Make them! Please do, point out why, you have them. Don't generalize, express why you have formed such opinions and what they have to do with the posted video, of the aircrafts accomplishments in that video.

    BTW: Why is it that you have to resort to name calling and insulting personal remarks in all of your posts to and about me. "Fuckwit, dull cnut, etc. I don't find them amusing or particularly bright from a man of your education, etc.

    I don't address you in this way, even though sorely tempted to reply in kind, I see no reason why you have to resort to such inane juvenile behavior.

    BTW: Much of what is said about 'Know-it-alls on the website below and posted before fit's you to a 'T'. :roll:

    Particually this one:

    "The know-it-all may be a highly intelligent person but their know-it-all attitude makes them narrow minded and less and less able to learn as the years roll by. "

    http://www.hypnosisdownloads.com/downloads/difficult-people/know-all.html
     
  15. wow international bitchfight...