by John Reed on May 1, 2012
Here’s your photo of the day, an awesome shot of the F-35 Join Strike Fighter in afterburner.
Enjoy.
H/t SNAFU.
May 1st, 2012 | Air, F-35 Watch, Fast Movers, Planes, Copters, Blimps | 1713671 Commentshttp%3A%2F%2Fdefensetech.org%2F2012%2F05%2F01%2Fpic-of-the-day-f-35-in-burner%2FPic+of+the+Day%3A+F-35+in+Burner2012-05-01+15%3A25%3A17John+Reedhttp%3A%2F%2Fdefensetech.org%2F%3Fp%3D17136
Previous post: F-22s in the UAE May Just Be There for an Exercise, Really
Next post: Mid Week Video: China’s Carrier Up-Close
Defense Tech examines the intersection of technology and defense from every angle and provides analysis on what’s ahead.
{ 71 comments… read them below or add one }
first post!
Oooooh! Very nice!
Any idea what version?
The link below for the original pic has a caption stating F-35B.
The expensive version!
Aren't they all expensive? ; )
Daaaanger Zooooone!
I believe it's the A version, it has the USAF roundel.
Pretty sure its a B, you can see the roll post doors on the bottom wing root.
May look fast but maybe not maneuverable.. But whatever its still cool!
Maneuverability depends on the variant… F35A is rated for the same level of maneuverability as the F-16… test pilots have said in some ways it more maneuverable than the F-16 and in other ways more comparable to the F/A-18. Yes, F35B and F35C are rated lower, but out perform both the AV-8B and A-10.
As Jeff notes, the A model is a 9g airframe. Since it carries its stores internally, in an LO configuration it should carry it's speed in a turn longer than the F-16. JOn Beesley went so far as to say the A model is comparable to a clean F-16 Blk50. So You have to be careful how you define 'maneuverability'. Comparing the F-35C to the F-18C/D/E/F we find identical 7.5g ratings, but the F-35C should have a quicker initial turn rate than the 'A' because of the bigger wing, but I would expect that same wing to burn off speed with higher drag. The Marines traded G-rating for other things, among them the ability to go supersonic, and again, in a clean configuration externally, it should hold the Gs it can pull at higher speeds for longer than the Harrier just about everywhere in the flight envelope.
if its maneuverable enough to kill the pilot without the avionics to limit the planes performance to prevent such a thing – then its maneuverable enough.
Link to original (hi-res) picture:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lockheedmartin/71170…
Oh that high res pic totally changed my mind about maneuverability! lol
"F-35B Transonic Shock
Flight test of the F-35B with visible transonic flow, April 19, 2012 at Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Md."
Not transonic shock. TS would accumulate on the front of the aircraft.
BURNING LEGENDS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I am going to say again since you troll this plane. It does things that other planes today cant do! Besides your constantly talking about cost. Cost will go down in time. God willing if I get to fly in the USMC I would want to fly this airplane in the event that a real war breaks out
Well, I'm in the Navy and I too am working towards being a pilot and, God willing, if I get to fly I would pick the Super Hornet Block II rather than the F-35C. The Super Hornet is dependable, reliable, heavily armed, flexible, and it has two engines. The only thing the F-35s do that other aircraft can't is be stealthy. In order to achieve that it sacrifices heavily in all other areas of performance, especially maintainability. The advanced sensor suite of the F-35 can also easily be added to the Super Hornet. Stealth is an advantage, but it is not an absolute necessity and we can still defeat our enemies without it by utilizing good tactics and advanced ordinance. Integrating stealth into our forces is important, but not at the cost of other things, especially flexibility and aircraft numbers. We don't need the F-35 when our current jets are good enough and will continue to be for many years. The EA-18G Growler and Super Hornet Block III with some advanced weapons can easily handle all our current and future threats and last us until a 6th gen fighter is made.
That's a hell of a choice. The sucker fly or the F-35. I hope you're good at tanking.
You cant just tack on the improvements that the F-35 has onto the F-18. Right we are going to wait for a 6th gen now, what so you can then say no no no we dont need a 6th gen we can just bring back F-4 and mustangs and slingshots to take out whatever advanced fighter come our way
IN the interest of understanding, might one ask what is your grade and what exactly it is that you 'do' in the Navy?
I'm a 2nd class midshipman at the Naval Academy in Annapolis. For the most part I take classes that are taught in a regular college (physics, chemistry,…) only ours are faster paced and more in depth. Along with those classes I take a lot of military classes about weapon systems, navigation, history, and several other things. I'm also taking Russian. My service assignment night is in November and that's when I'll find out if I'm going to be a pilot or not after I graduate.
Take Chinese instead
Back when I was a plebe…. ;)
I am familiar with NA life, What is your squadron?
Also i know it is not on the same level but look how much money was invested into the Manhattan Project
Totally not comparable here…
Watch out world because that plane is slicker than owl sh!t.
Mmmmmm. Pretty picture plane, yes? Transonic flow makes for a great effect, almost sci-fi, which fits perfectly with the F-35's image. These 5th Gens look awesome.
Flew in a 16 in'05 the pilot said he wanted the F-35 more than the 22 as his dream ride. I think they should make a dmodel a twin engine/seat version and throw a gau-8 avenger in that sucker…make that a howitzer and call it a day. Hey for a trillion dollars We can build anything!
The next step to creating a Super Lightening should be easy. I would expect to see a strike version within 10-20 years after the regular models are operational. Kinda like how they stretched the Eagle and Hornets.
STFU
Pitty the plane is only a Mach 1 fighter. Wish they make them faster.
Speed actually isn't too important for fighters. Most engagements still happen in the transonic regime.
The Single Engine F-35 Lightning Is Not Worth The Price.
I haven't seen a pic with the extra attachment on the nose before. That just for the flight testing or is it there for the 'retail' version too?
test probes
Evidently the filters don't like the word that rhymes with 'toad' but begins with the letter between 'o' and 'r'. Short version: It is an Alpha-Beta- "rhymes with toad"
sheesh. I must be tired. Scratch 'toad' insert 'robe'.
Its for telemetry to the ground station.
New Article in "Foreign Policy Magazine " just released "The Jet That Ate the Pentagon "
It pretty well sums up this monstrosity of a Failed & Flawed Program.
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/04/26/…
Really? I read: The Bad Press that ate the Jet…
Jus sayin'
The best afterburner pics I always saw are the Blackbirds on takeoff in darkness. Seeing the exhaust diamonds were sweet and an unexplained phenomena. Also it's rare to find such pics as well. This one in the midst of transonic is top 3 on my list while that other one of the F18 is #2.
Good shot all the same.
Exhaust diamonds are also called shock diamonds and are fairly well understood. Basic science here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shock_diamond
That picture with the shock diamonds is the last bit of proof I need to claim that the Blackbird is not military but a space-plane out of Stargate SG1. They look so different than anything else we have.
What a beautiful bird.
Have you ever seen an F-8 Crusader in AB at dusk? More impressive.
mmmmm I get a feeling after all the hoo haa about costs, capabilities service dates etc that this may well be a good thing. Because its so new and there are not many everybody is thinking bad things, remember this is not like building the family car so as soon as they start coming off the assembly line in some sort of numbers people will back off. It would help if Brits worked out what hey wanted the "b" or "c" but thats a whole differant arguement
bizarre mods on this sight …very inconsitent. i quess they delete the posts that offer a different view than their own opinions,
Will all due respect, the proper term for this would be "in full augmentor," not "afterburner."
http://www.geaviation.com/education/vocabulary.ht…
Afterburner
The afterburner is an assembly aft of the turbine section that supplies atomized fuel into the exhaust airflow to increase exhaust temperature and pressure. Afterburners use large quantities of fuel, and thus are used for short periods of time only. Afterburners are used on turbojet engines to increase thrust for short periods of time during takeoff, climb and supersonic flight. Very few commercial aircraft use afterburners. Afterburners are usually on military aircraft only.
Augmentor
Augmentors are afterburners on low-bypass turbofan engines. Core airflow and bypass (fan) airflow are mixed aft of the turbines, in the exhaust. Fuel nozzles supply atomized fuel into the airflow and an igniter ignites the fuel/air mixture. Augmentors are used on low-bypass turbofan engines to increase thrust for short periods during takeoff, climb, and combat flight.
Augmentor Exhaust Nozzles
Augmentor exhaust nozzles make up the aft end of augmented low-bypass turbofan engines. It has a flame holder, fuel nozzles, an igniter, and a variable exhaust nozzle. The fuel nozzles supply atomized fuel into the exhaust airflow and the igniter makes the fuel/air mixture burn. Augmentor exhaust nozzles are used on low-bypass turbofan engines to increase thrust.
Ooh. Learned something.
It's a common misconception. Older fighter aircraft have "afterburners," but most engines developed in the past 30-35 years are low-bypass motors, so it would be called "augmentor."
"Augmentor" just sounds wimpy.
No one's naming their movie/rock album/sports car "Augmentor"
Oh- since the F35 can't supercruise- we might be seeing a lot of the "Augmentor"
But are you Smarter than a 5th grader?
More like,
"Do you remember useless irrelevant trivia from 5th grade that you forgot because you had more important things to remember"?
Money can do anything I just love to see that f35 fly by its awsome! The Dutch f-35 is test flying also.We must stay on top in every bit of tech in every service..
I hope this jets are worth the 1.51 trillion dollars the program i costin us, but they sure do look badass!
Get some…
Looks like Canada is going to have a complete restart and a competition for it's new Fighter Aircraft , not automatically sign on to the F-35 JSF . With a lot of support for both the Super Hornet and the Gripen NG. Here is a link to yesterdays main headlines,
http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/201…
wow i like it,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Australia Delays F-35 Order by 2 Years. I think they are holding off to see just how much more it's going to cost and how many more problems come up before the take the "Plunge". They have fulfilled their original commitment to buy 2 F-35 which have already been delivered for testing and if they don't want to don't have to buy any more. So it begins the Spiral of Death.
http://www.defensenews.com/article/20120503/DEFRE…
looks like the paint vaporizing off the bodywork
The Single Engine F-35 Lightning,Is Not Worth The Price.
Turkey will buy 100 F-35A :))
do you know guys that Japan has chosen the US-made F-35 stealth jet as its next-generation mainstay fighter in a multi-billion dollar deal? http://airsoc.com/articles/view/id/4ee7094ac6f8fa…
I'm more worried about the Russians. They have more tanks and more combat aircraft of better quality. They have a lot more training, experience, and the worse their economic situation gets the more desperate they are becoming and more likely to do something rash. The Russians scare me a lot more than the supposedly feared "China Expansion" scare that's been going around. The Chinese military is still very poor in quality and will continue to be a long time. The only real advantages they have are a good economy and large numbers, but they really don't have the capability to draft all of their men into their military and they have a large host of other economic and social problems that the media in the west tends to not focus on. The Russians are more heavily armed, more innovative, more clever, and overall better than the Chinese as far as being a formidable opponent goes. It is worth noting that China also has a lot of internal enemies from the cruelty of its own system. They spend more money on internal security than they do on national defense, which shows that they fear what's inside their own country more than what is abroad.
Im sorry, but it is very comparabl. You assume you know the ability of the F-35. Now are there problems in cost, offcourse. But the money being spent on these planes is going to advancements that you simply di not understand. Your paper you wrote factors in a lot of errors or plain misinformation. In your coments regarding China as to being a small threat due to them being underequiped is rather dumb. Im assuming your Naval Accademy history classes are not as rigurous as you say. Pllease look at our own military before WWI and WWII. A lot can happen in a time of war. I appologize for missspellings and bad grammer my phone is not allowing me to correct my post.-
Russia and the the US have no reason to clash. Russia won't try to retake the Baltic states and if they want Georgia- they can have them.
China- well – we have the Norks, Taiwan, and the South China Sea to worry about/fight over.
Your analysis needs some work- I heard Annapolis was lowering their standards.
Whoever told you that Naval Acad is "…lowering their standards." is real light-headed! It's one of the toughest schools in the world! Ask any graduate.
I think USAFA is the one with squadrons. We have companies.