2D thrust vectoring for the F-35A and F-35C?

After only six attempts I finally got Global Security to fix the B vs C
confusion on their Joint Strike Fighter page.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...craft/f-35.htm

But the pic they picked to show the three variants raises a question.

Will the F-35A and F-35C have 2D thrust vectoring (like the F/A-22) or not?

-HJC

On Tue, 02 Mar 2004 17:40:31 -0800, Henry J Cobb wrote:

After only six attempts I finally got Global Security to fix the B vs C
confusion on their Joint Strike Fighter page.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...craft/f-35.htm

But the pic they picked to show the three variants raises a question.

Will the F-35A and F-35C have 2D thrust vectoring (like the F/A-22) or not?

-HJC


Nope. The X-32 would have but not the 35. My guess is they could
have but maybe Lockhhed didn't want it competing with the F-22.

Scott Ferrin wrote:
On Tue, 02 Mar 2004 17:40:31 -0800, Henry J Cobb wrote:
Will the F-35A and F-35C have 2D thrust vectoring (like the F/A-22) or not?

Nope. The X-32 would have but not the 35. My guess is they could
have but maybe Lockhhed didn't want it competing with the F-22.

Too late for that.

The Marines are about to get the best dogfighter in the world.

How fast can it go and still use the roll nozzles? (Or does the lift fan
have to be open to use those?)

-HJC
And does this mean that the F/A-22 can use shorter runways than the F-35A?

Henry J Cobb wrote:
The Marines are about to get the best dogfighter in the world.

In fact, the Air Force seems to have set the most demanding maneuverability
requirements of the three versions.

How fast can it go and still use the roll nozzles? (Or does the lift
fan have to be open to use those?)

I seriously doubt that STOVL attitude puffer jets will provide much control
authority at any speed much above the hover, comapred to the real control
surfaces. If they could, you'd see suggestions to add puffers to non-STOVL
planes. If such proposals exist, I've not seen them.
--
Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail
"If brave men and women never died, there would be nothing
special about bravery." -- Andy Rooney (attributed)

"Henry J Cobb" wrote in message
...
The Marines are about to get the best dogfighter in the world.

Nope. No VIFFing on this one. If you could even open all the doors on the
lift system at high speeds, they'd probably just tear off anyway.

How fast can it go and still use the roll nozzles? (Or does the lift fan
have to be open to use those?)

Speaking to the X-35B.....The roll posts don't get thrust from the lift fan,
but the system is mechanized to not use roll posts in conventional flight.
Aero moments are way bigger than thrust in roll above like 90kts, and thrust
rolling moments are comparatively negligible at 150.

And does this mean that the F/A-22 can use shorter runways than the F-35A?

Depends on the weight condition.

Scott Ferrin wrote:


Nope. The X-32 would have but not the 35. My guess is they could
have but maybe Lockhhed didn't want it competing with the F-22.

Or they didn't want to pay the weight penalty in an aircraft designed for
strike over air-to-air.

I recently suggested that if the F/A-22 were canceled, the Air Force might
look at an air-to-air version of JSF. An axi-symetrical thrust vectoring
nozzle would be high on the list of desirable modifications for such an
aircraft, I suspect.

--
Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail
"If brave men and women never died, there would be nothing
special about bravery." -- Andy Rooney (attributed)

The Russians developed a "round" TV nozzle for thier Flankers as have the
Indians, so it is at LEAST a possibility for the future.
I believe the nozzles on the F-22 and F-35 are too far to the rear to make
any real differance in T/O distance or landing roll, but the massive thrust
may get them to speed more quickly.

"Thomas Schoene" wrote in message
hlink.net...
Scott Ferrin wrote:


Nope. The X-32 would have but not the 35. My guess is they could
have but maybe Lockhhed didn't want it competing with the F-22.

Or they didn't want to pay the weight penalty in an aircraft designed for
strike over air-to-air.

I recently suggested that if the F/A-22 were canceled, the Air Force might
look at an air-to-air version of JSF. An axi-symetrical thrust vectoring
nozzle would be high on the list of desirable modifications for such an
aircraft, I suspect.

--
Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail
"If brave men and women never died, there would be nothing
special about bravery." -- Andy Rooney (attributed)

On Wed, 03 Mar 2004 03:19:41 GMT, "Thomas Schoene"
wrote:

Scott Ferrin wrote:


Nope. The X-32 would have but not the 35. My guess is they could
have but maybe Lockhhed didn't want it competing with the F-22.

Or they didn't want to pay the weight penalty in an aircraft designed for
strike over air-to-air.

I recently suggested that if the F/A-22 were canceled, the Air Force might
look at an air-to-air version of JSF. An axi-symetrical thrust vectoring
nozzle would be high on the list of desirable modifications for such an
aircraft, I suspect.
i already assumed that the JSF will have a good radar system in it
since it has to replace the F-16 in US and allied inventories. but the
question that im wondering is if the two or more F-22 can work as
Hunter/Killers, could the F-22 also work with a JSF as a Hunter/Killer
team.Basically the Hunter F-22 would lock a target or targets and
track it passing the information to the shooter(Killer) aircraft that
is radar silent and 20mi ahead of the Hunter aircraft and the Shooter
would fire the missle. All the while the Target was locked on, or
trying to lock on to the Hunter aircraft. Basically if follows the
golden rule, what you dont see will kill you..

On Wed, 03 Mar 2004 03:19:41 GMT, "Thomas Schoene"
wrote:

Scott Ferrin wrote:


Nope. The X-32 would have but not the 35. My guess is they could
have but maybe Lockhhed didn't want it competing with the F-22.

Or they didn't want to pay the weight penalty in an aircraft designed for
strike over air-to-air.

I recently suggested that if the F/A-22 were canceled, the Air Force might
look at an air-to-air version of JSF. An axi-symetrical thrust vectoring
nozzle would be high on the list of desirable modifications for such an
aircraft, I suspect.


I'd think they'd have to make quite a few changes to make it good
enough to be the primary air to air fighter. Internal weapon load is
tiny (2 -120s), the thrust to weight leaves a lot to be desired, and
how does it fair in the manueverability dept.? Sure you can add
external weapons but then there goes your stealth. Then when the
politicians start screaming because the F-35's cost is going up and
service date is getting pushed back so the required changes can be
incorporated. . .

"Scott Ferrin" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 03 Mar 2004 03:19:41 GMT, "Thomas Schoene"
wrote:

Scott Ferrin wrote:


Nope. The X-32 would have but not the 35. My guess is they could
have but maybe Lockhhed didn't want it competing with the F-22.

Or they didn't want to pay the weight penalty in an aircraft designed for
strike over air-to-air.

I recently suggested that if the F/A-22 were canceled, the Air Force
might
look at an air-to-air version of JSF. An axi-symetrical thrust vectoring
nozzle would be high on the list of desirable modifications for such an
aircraft, I suspect.


I'd think they'd have to make quite a few changes to make it good
enough to be the primary air to air fighter. Internal weapon load is
tiny (2 -120s), the thrust to weight leaves a lot to be desired, and
how does it fair in the manueverability dept.? Sure you can add
external weapons but then there goes your stealth. Then when the
politicians start screaming because the F-35's cost is going up and
service date is getting pushed back so the required changes can be
incorporated. . .

We can hope the F-35 folks will stand their ground.