First Carrier Landing of the F-35

Well, I think it is cool to see. :rolleyes2:

I would love to land one on a carrier! :eek:
 
Last edited:
Two came aboard yesterday, there doesn't seem to be much word of dash-2.
First cat shot today.

Whaddya think, another decade 'til IOC? ;)

Nauga,
haze gray...
 
Was that a "Hail Mary" at 0:40?
 
Hawker800 said:
Was that a "Hail Mary" at 0:40?
Click to expand...
The pilot salutes the catapult officer ("shooter") signalling that he's ready to go.

Nauga,
who wonders if it's 'shooter' or 'shoe-tour' :D
 
nauga said:
The pilot salutes the catapult officer ("shooter") signalling that he's ready to go.

Nauga,
who wonders if it's 'shooter' or 'shoe-tour' :D
Click to expand...

thats a no ****ter......real salute.....you don't know what you are about to get, but you hope it "feels right"
 
nauga said:
Two came aboard yesterday, there doesn't seem to be much word of dash-2.
First cat shot today.

Whaddya think, another decade 'til IOC? ;)

Nauga,
haze gray...
Click to expand...

<1 year... at least for the USMC
 
Geico266 said:
Well, I think it is cool to see. :rolleyes2:
Click to expand...

It is cool, Geico, but us old farts are somewhat jaded. For instance, I grew up reading all the aviation magazines, seeing the American War Machine pumping out a new airframe every five years or so. It seemed so easy. I had no idea how many years of advance work it took to get to the point where a nice glossy article would show up in a magazine, touting the next great thing, due to hit the fleet in a couple years.

Fast forward a few years, and there I am, sitting in a big room with no windows battling with engineers and fellow warriors as we read threat projections and came up with requirements for the JSF. That was over 15 years ago! At the time, I actually thought to myself, "Better work hard on this, Cat. Your newborn son could be flying one of these." I just had no idea he might be flying it on it's first deployment (that timing is not so far fetched, the way things are going now).
 
catmandu said:
It is cool, Geico, but us old farts are somewhat jaded. For instance, I grew up reading all the aviation magazines, seeing the American War Machine pumping out a new airframe every five years or so. It seemed so easy. I had no idea how many years of advance work it took to get to the point where a nice glossy article would show up in a magazine, touting the next great thing, due to hit the fleet in a couple years.

Fast forward a few years, and there I am, sitting in a big room with no windows battling with engineers and fellow warriors as we read threat projections and came up with requirements for the JSF. That was over 15 years ago! At the time, I actually thought to myself, "Better work hard on this, Cat. Your newborn son could be flying one of these." I just had no idea he might be flying it on it's first deployment (that timing is not so far fetched, the way things are going now).
Click to expand...

Money "priorities" have definitely changed the landscape for the military and space exploration. :rolleyes2:
 
catmandu said:
It is cool, Geico, but us old farts are somewhat jaded. For instance, I grew up reading all the aviation magazines, seeing the American War Machine pumping out a new airframe every five years or so. It seemed so easy. I had no idea how many years of advance work it took to get to the point where a nice glossy article would show up in a magazine, touting the next great thing, due to hit the fleet in a couple years.

Fast forward a few years, and there I am, sitting in a big room with no windows battling with engineers and fellow warriors as we read threat projections and came up with requirements for the JSF. That was over 15 years ago! At the time, I actually thought to myself, "Better work hard on this, Cat. Your newborn son could be flying one of these." I just had no idea he might be flying it on it's first deployment (that timing is not so far fetched, the way things are going now).
Click to expand...

That is the progress in the development of technology. The platforms being produced these days are infinitely more complex. Plus we are replacing manned aerial warfare. With drones we can go back to high attrition cheap platforms model. Wait till someone comes out with a crew served quad copter that can loft anti tank missiles and even an M-134. Result for cost, the tech in the manned air sector hasn't really paid off on the modern battlefield. Your son may not get to finish a career flying in the military.

Back in the day we could run any 5 programs of attrition tech aircraft programs for the cost of one of these stealth platforms. When you try to assure the mission by assuring the life of the pilots, things get expensive.;)
 
Henning said:
Kinda late for that now...:rolleyes:
Click to expand...


Sure, now that the company that's building it has spread out development across the country so that any threat of cancellation will have the politicians screaming "why do you hate jobs!?!?!" while counting their campaign donations...

I agree on the unmanned aircraft. They should replace these very expensive jets that are meant to combine way too many roles into one airframe. When they try that, everything becomes a compromise, and the aircraft are masters in no domain.
 
Geico266 said:
Money "priorities" have definitely changed the landscape for the military and space exploration. :rolleyes2:
Click to expand...
Nope, it's the lawyers. Lawyers are running programs now, not the engineers.
 
Fearless Tower said:
That might be a little optimistic. We still have to get through OT on my ship next summer.
Click to expand...

Have they gotten the ship landing decks retrofitted so they don't buckle from the exhaust during VTOL operations? Seems like a pretty important part of the USMC equation for the jet.

And I don't think I'll ever get used to seeing a single engine jet taking off from an aircraft carrier. Just seems wrong.

I wonder if Navy pilots (not the brass) still have concerns about flying on a single engine.
 
UngaWunga said:
Sure, now that the company that's building it has spread out development across the country so that any threat of cancellation will have the politicians screaming "why do you hate jobs!?!?!" while counting their campaign donations...

I agree on the unmanned aircraft. They should replace these very expensive jets that are meant to combine way too many roles into one airframe. When they try that, everything becomes a compromise, and the aircraft are masters in no domain.
Click to expand...

Mostly "kinda late" because 90% of the money has already been spent.
 
Fredbob711 said:
Have they gotten the ship landing decks retrofitted so they don't buckle from the exhaust during VTOL operations?
Click to expand...

The decks are getting strengthened to handle the increased weight (it is a big bird...like 2.5 times an AV-8B).

We have not experienced any deck issues from the exhaust. The only issues I am aware of are on land (they have experienced runway surface failure from the exhaust heat boiling moisture in the runway surface).

As far as VTOL, the F-35B is not advertised as such. It is a VSTOL. The airplane is capable of it, but Vertical takeoff was not one of the govt requirements.
 
I wonder if the pilot said, " Hey CAP'N....hold me beer and watch this..."
 
The manned airplane Air Force folks are experiencing the same denial as battleship captains circa 1915. But we the baddest mofos the battlefield has ever seen... :no:
Henning said:
That is the progress in the development of technology. The platforms being produced these days are infinitely more complex. Plus we are replacing manned aerial warfare. With drones we can go back to high attrition cheap platforms model. Wait till someone comes out with a crew served quad copter that can loft anti tank missiles and even an M-134. Result for cost, the tech in the manned air sector hasn't really paid off on the modern battlefield. Your son may not get to finish a career flying in the military.

Back in the day we could run any 5 programs of attrition tech aircraft programs for the cost of one of these stealth platforms. When you try to assure the mission by assuring the life of the pilots, things get expensive.;)
Click to expand...
 
Would have been benched long ago if politics were not involved. It's a loser. Saying we might as well keep building it is not too bright an idea. McNamara tried this same " all purpose airplane" years ago with the swing wing f 117. It was also a loser. This dog should be discontinued before any more taxpayers money is wasted. Other country's have drastically cut back their commitment to this loser. 90 percent already spent is just plain wrong! Many more billions will be wasted if allowed to continue.
 
Lindberg said:
It's never too late to cancel a bad project.

Sunk Cost Fallacy
Click to expand...

I remember a few years ago when the Secretary of Defense (Gates at the time I believe) wanted to cancel the project for a new Marine One helicopter. The DoD had sunk something like $5 billion into the project already and were projecting another $10+ billion to complete it which would have been grossly over-budget. Some in Congress didn't want to cancel it (yay for pork spending) and some Congressman made the comment along the lines of 'well we already spent $5 billion on it so why not just finish it?' Wish I could have smacked him upside the head.

Oh, and I believe this was during the time of 'we spend too much money, we need to cut spending, etc.'

That being said, they'll never cancel this project unfortunately. It's a complete boondoggle, but Lockheed Martin has lobbyists that are too good and they did a heck of a job spreading the project out to as many Congressional districts as possible. Add in the money international partners have sunk into the project and it's become a too-big-to-fail project

EvilEagle said:
The Navy guys I know are not looking forward to it.
Click to expand...

Didn't think Air Force & Navy pilots got along. :)
 
obviously not an Air Force model ... the tail hook didn't tear off on the first trap, the main gear didn't punch up thru the wings, and the nose gear didn't rip off under tension ... :)
 
gkainz said:
obviously not an Air Force model ... the tail hook didn't tear off on the first trap, the main gear didn't punch up thru the wings, and the nose gear didn't rip off under tension ... :)
Click to expand...

Catapult forces on the nose gear have always impressed me more than the landing forces on the mains (and nose). That's a lot of horsepower pulling on that sucker.:eek:
 
gkainz said:
obviously not an Air Force model ... the tail hook didn't tear off on the first trap...
Click to expand...
This wasn't the original hook design ;)

Nauga,
From where the food is
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top