jules48 wrote:Its been reported they had 9 refuels in an 8 hour flight.Is that right.How can they be the new front line aircraft if they cannot fly more then a 1000 miles without refuelling and assume they were not even supersonic.
Trails are not just a case of draining the tanks and refilling them. There are lots of other considerations to ensure each jet has an appropriate fuel load at any particular point on the journey.
true, they are about consuming outrageous amounts of ale at places like Lajes, Halifax etc
Nikon P900 (Sony DSC-HX400V, Sony DSC-HX300 and DSC-H2 retired)
jules48 wrote:Its been reported they had 9 refuels in an 8 hour flight.Is that right.How can they be the new front line aircraft if they cannot fly more then a 1000 miles without refuelling and assume they were not even supersonic.
Trails are not just a case of draining the tanks and refilling them. There are lots of other considerations to ensure each jet has an appropriate fuel load at any particular point on the journey.
true, they are about consuming outrageous amounts of ale at places like Lajes, Halifax etc
Or, if this is the future, not doing so. Much better in “the old days”!
I'm sure the F-35B's range is classified but Google would have me believe its not much more than 1000 nautical miles. Remember the B model has very limited internal space and extra weight to carry around with that huge lift fan. It seems a great pity there couldn't have been a catapult on the new carrier and we could have had the C model.
Xm657 wrote:I'm sure the F-35B's range is classified but Google would have me believe its not much more than 1000 nautical miles. Remember the B model has very limited internal space and extra weight to carry around with that huge lift fan. It seems a great pity there couldn't have been a catapult on the new carrier and we could have had the C model.
Agree that the C model would oc been the best choice.
When you invest in CATOBAR, it's not just the cost of fitting catapults and ordering the slightly more expensive C variant instead. The two nations in the world who operate CATOBAR carriers both have squadrons effectively dedicated to the one job of operating from the carriers. Unlike STOVL, which you can practice anywhere with a suitable landing surface, CATOBAR training in practice requires the use of an aircraft carrier. For the US, this works out fine, they've got 11 carriers. France on the other hand has had to deploy their Rafales across to the US simply to maintain currency on a significant part of their pilot's roles, as their single carrier is undergoing a refit. Assuming we could still have afforded the two carriers if they were CATOBAR, that's a very big and very expensive asset to have sailing around UK waters being nothing but a training aid for pilots.
Additionally, the QE class doesn't produce steam, unlike their nuclear (and previously steam) powered counterparts. Of course, there's EMALS, but EMALS is new and temperamental technology today, let alone ten years ago when the carriers were ordered.
The French situation is a good example of the high costs of 'saving money'; the second carrier of the class was cancelled in 2003 as some comptoir de haricots calculated that switching to non-nuclear would shave a billion Euros off the price. Despite all the debugging that had been done with R91, it was decided to start from scratch. And then that was itself cancelled.
So everytime the Rafales are deployed across the Atlantic we can deduct that from the billion Euros 'saving'.
Just heard John Humphreys on Radio 4 at 07.40, talking about security at Marham. He was saying some spotters were overheard saying to each other how there was just a wooden fence protecting the multi million pound F35s. Maybe expect a new Iron curtain to surround the place after that gripe.ha,ha
Don't say something crass, to hide your envy. Just give credit, when its applicable...
Posts on the Milscanners newsgroup have it that the F-35s will start operating next Monday ( 18th ) Can't vouch for the accuracy of that, given that people on some forums were saying they were going to start operating last Monday ( 11th )
Tôi chỉ đặt cái này ở đây để giữ cho người điều hành bận rộn 아직도 숨어있다
Brevet Cable wrote:Posts on the Milscanners newsgroup have it that the F-35s will start operating next Monday ( 18th ) Can't vouch for the accuracy of that, given that people on some forums were saying they were going to start operating last Monday ( 11th )
That's stealth for you Brevet. We've had all 4 them through the valley at some point during this week, but they must have had the stealth mode switched on, as they didn't even appear in the photographs.
"Nice pics mate" comments only! No criticism please.
To be fair I expect the pilots are probably having a few days well-earned leave after being deployed to the States for a few months. Ground crews will also be learning their new toys. Once they get going I expect one or two will fly each day.
I still can't understand the point of the RAF F-35Bs having a vertical landing capability. Don't they melt or set fire to anything they land on that is un-reinforced?
Are these VLPs basically just for training the RN pilots?