Thruster87 Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=Ki86x1WKPmE The media and the program critics had predicted that we would burn holes in the deck and wash sailors overboard. Neither of which happened. You will notice a sailor standing on the bow of the ship as the jet rotates. That was an intentional part of the sea trials. Nocatapult... No hook.... It’s a new world out there! The shape and scope of warfare – worldwide – just changed. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winsor68 Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 Amazing... just a shame that such incredibly beautiful engineering feats are going to be used to kill so many people... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
airangel Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 Interesting how the "elevators" lower themselves to achieve "climb" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eastmeg2 Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 There seemed to be a lot of parts moving and changing configuration just before leaving the carrier deck. It would probably get pretty messy if one or more of those things didn't happen when it's supposed to . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piet Fil Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 I'd love to see some footage of it vectoring from takeoff config to clean flying. they are one amazing bit of technology. Phil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Howard Hughes Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 Wouldn't mind one of those for work, could land right at the hospital, now where would we stick the patient? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazza 38 Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 Wouldn't mind one of those for work, could land right at the hospital, now where would we stick the patient? Shove them in the internal Bomb bay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Maj Millard Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 Just love the way the rear jet nozzle rotates downwards for lift-off. That large panel just rear of the cockpit must be strong as there is a bit of area there, plus it's got to be getting sucked downwards by that large inlet fan. Speeds at takeoff remind me of those of the carrier-based aircraft of WW2 (Corsairs, Hellcats etc). great looking aircraft, but I bet the pilots are sitting on one hell of a quick bang-seat !!..................................................Maj... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Howard Hughes Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 Shove them in the internal Bomb bay Not a bad idea, couldn't hear the flight nurse talking from there... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazza 38 Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 Lockheed Martin are still having a few problems (alot of little problems) with their Flight Test Programe. Already the estimated rework on their few Batches of LRIP aircraft will be betwen 2 to 5 million per aircraft.The biggest failure so far a been a power pack.In the Vstol version.It was a one off (so far). The aircraft has been designed for a Airframe life of 8000 hours.Some airframe parts and individual components not up to standard.Hence the rework. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Maj Millard Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 This is indeed a more advanced machine with new capabilities, combining some older ones, but no doubt pushing the envelope all the way. There are bound to be problems along the way, however watch out when it's all sorted as I don't believe anybody else including the poms who came up with the VTOL Harrier, has anything like this on the drawing board...............................................Maj... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djpacro Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 ..... That large panel just rear of the cockpit must be strong as there is a bit of area there, plus it's got to be getting sucked downwards by that large inlet fan. .... I went looking for a diagram of the sections that we designed in Australia but could only find the text below. We certainly did a lot of the structural design of the bellmouth area.http://www.business.vic.gov.au/BUSVIC/STANDARD/PC_64615.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
campslive Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 I went looking for a diagram of the sections that we designed in Australia but could only find the text below. We certainly did a lot of the structural design of the bellmouth area.http://www.business.vic.gov.au/BUSVIC/STANDARD/PC_64615.html what an amazing great looking machine the pilots must have a lot of faith in the under carraige there was a few landings that did the old bounce test, looks like less and less crew needed now with machines like this?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fly_tornado Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 you wonder how well it lands with some battle damage. all those doors and panels look like an accident waiting to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shags_j Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 I think it was Aviation Australia latest issue has a big article covering the delay and issues with design. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazza 38 Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 HI Shags, Australian Aviation Mag, I buy it every month.There is monthy updates on the F35. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nong Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 For all the money we are wasting on the F-35 we could have asked Jabiru to have a crack at building something competitive. Hey, why not? There is no point spending big bucks just for the chance to send our children out to die in these nasty little coffins. Who needs a fighting aircraft that is not fast enough to avoid getting run down when chased by what our opponents will be operating? Who needs a fighting aircraft that has to break off an engagement first because of lack of fuel? Who needs a fighting aircraft that runs out of munitions because its payload capability limits it to half or less than what its likely opposition can carry. Who needs a fighting aircraft that doesn't have the payload/range to do the job where distances are big? What suckers our pollies and public servants were, to fall for all that "interoperability" and "networked" hype, as if that makes up for the lack of performance against the usual and still very valid yardsticks. "But it's not meant to be an air domination fighter". Fair enough. So its a battlefield ground strafer, eh? Not for that kind of dough! We can find something cheaper for that job. Even an obsolete FA-18 (new or old type) can be "gee whizz" impressive at an air display or on YOU-TUBE. The battle theatre is likely to be more demanding. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fly_tornado Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 ADF loves wasting money on hitech toys. We should really have a decent amount of drones as they have proven themselves to be a cost effective platform but its unlikely as the airforce wants the latest toys to play with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winsor68 Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 These machines are not going to be useful if required in the defense of our country... unfortunately it seems our military is buying war machines and mostly figures they will be used in US ally lead conflicts overseas... for this role they will fit the United States requirements for us perfectly. Honestly... it seems if a threat was to enter our airspace in far northern Australia these things would not be able to get there... let alone with enough fuel and payload to do anything. These are political toys... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
campslive Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 ADF loves wasting money on hitech toys.We already have a decent amount of drones as they have proven themselves to be a cost effective platform but its unlikely as the airforce wants the latest toys to play with. aust brought 200 drones and hve 20 of them now but they are sitting in afganistan with operational airfield until march to operate from? as for the f 35 with the yanks building a base up north why are we wasting money i am certain there is something as good or better out there that would of been delivered on time and within budget sounds like the old f111 saga all over again ops ,,,, 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now