Fully F-35B Ready: Italian Navy aircraft carrier Cavour changes wing

The Italian aircraft carrier ITS Cavour ("Cavour") has completed a test program with F-35B fighters and received a certificate of readiness to work with American aircraft. It is reported by defense-blog.com.

According to the portal, the aircraft carrier, which has been at the US naval base in Norfolk since February this year, completed test flights of F-35B fighters, thereby confirming the readiness to use the new wing. In total, 120 vertical landings, 115 takeoffs from a springboard and two vertical takeoffs were performed on the aircraft carrier's flight deck.

Now the aircraft carrier is ready to receive fifth-generation F-35B fighters with short takeoff and vertical landing and completely changes its air wing. In order to replace the deck aviation The Kavura Italian Defense Ministry previously ordered 30 additional F-35B fighters in the US for the Navy and Air Force, which will join the F-35A version already ordered. The first F-35B for the Navy was received in January 2018.

The new F-35B fighters will replace the outdated AV-8B Harrier attack aircraft that were part of the ship's wing. Before the modernization, the ship carried eight attack aircraft and 12 helicopters.

The aircraft carrier ITS Cavour is the flagship of the Italian Navy. Laid down on July 17, 2001, launched on July 20, 2004. Officially transferred to the Navy on March 27, 2007, but entered service on June 10, 2009. For modernization under the F-35 was sent to the dock at the shipyard fleet in Taranto in the summer of 2019.

Key Features: Displacement standard 27910 tons, full over 35000 tons. 244 meter length, 39 meter width, 8,7 meter draft. The speed of 30 knots. 7000 nautical range on 16 nodes. Equipped with four gas turbine engines. The crew is a 486 man, as well as a 211 man of air personnel and 360 marines.

It is capable of transporting up to 100 units of wheeled vehicles, or 24 main combat vehicles. tank, or 50 heavy combat armored vehicles.

Comments

[prior]

"The aircraft carrier is now ready to receive the fifth generation F-35B fighters"

And the Italian aircraft carrier is ready to "accept" Russian "Daggers" ?!
This is a rhetorical question, just in case.

[sined]

And Russia, in turn, is ready to accept tridents? Instead of being happy that no one has to accept anything. You ask rhetorical questions like that ... you are not even enemies. What is it for? Why not treat technique as technique?

[prior]

That is, Italy has built a cruise ship and offers a tourist cruise around Europe?
And we should be happy about it and queue up for tickets?
No, really. Let them know exactly what awaits them.

[sined]

I didn't say to be happy about the Italian aircraft carrier and the like. Rejoice that your countries are not in a state of enmity. And treat technique as technique. Most countries in the world are in the habit of arming, accept it.

[prior]

Italian aircraft carrier as part of NATO. NATO declared Russia its enemy. Italy, as part of NATO countries, participated in the destruction of Libya, the same marauder like the rest in this pack.
Since they have a habit of arming themselves, let them be ready for destruction. Nothing new.
Did the Italians forget the snow-covered fields near Voronezh and Stalingrad for an hour?

[sined]

Okay. Apparently I mostly belong to modelers, who do not really care who is in NATO and who is not in NATO. People in the west of the Katyusha, T-34, Su-27 collect, as in Russia, the Tigers of the WWII, F-14 and so on. People share their impressions and few people care about politics; it is not peoples who declare each other as enemies. You can safely go to Italy, enjoy the views, just like Italians can come to Russia. People communicate calmly, what's the problem? Politicians today declare enemies, and tomorrow they are friends. Keep it simple.

[prior]

Much easier. So all NATO missiles and aircraft carriers are for peaceful communication with us ?!
I didn't understand right away. So Yugoslavia, a European country, was taught by the West with bombs in a loving, friendly way?
Thank you for clarifying, otherwise I would have lived worrying.

[donavi49]

Well, a blow to Cavour = Tridents in Moscow = Poplars in Rome.

[ironic]

So far, only sofas on the VO.

[ironic]

Enemies are only on the battlefield. As long as there are diplomatic relations, these are opponents.

[TermNachTer]

We stock up on Pepsi and popcorn))) let's see how the Italians will have fun with this super-airplane)))

[ironic]

She is the same as everyone who bought it. They will fly.

[TermNachTer]

Sho - then they do not fly strongly))) either fall, or fall into themselves))) I wish heroic Italian sailors, creative Uzbeks)))

[ironic]

And who will issue them and where? The question is rather funny though.

[vadim dok]

Silently envy Italy!

[xorek]

The sunset is beautiful in the video red-blue-white ..! There is nothing more to add.

[Cowbra]

Take for yourself, God, that we do not want

[Sidor Amenpodestovich]

Stop the refrigerator, stop the freezer, stop the boiler, stop the mobile phone! ITS Cavour.

[Errr]

From the article:

In total, as part of the tests on the flight deck of the aircraft carrier, 120 vertical landings, 115 takeoffs from the springboard were made and two vertical takeoffs.

And two vertical takeoffs ...
This is how legends are born. It's a pity that the article is unsigned. The storyteller chose to remain anonymous.

[Errr]

PS I am informing the members of the F-35B Vertical Takeoff Witnesses Sect.
With the thrust-to-weight ratio available to this miracle of some pitiful 1,1, even the rocket will not come off the launch pad (for this, it needs to have a thrust-to-weight ratio of at least 1,15). The main distinguishing feature of the F-35B is opportunity short takeoff and just vertical landing.
And so, minus silently and further, uneducated loops.

[zlinn]

of course, with full refueling and combat load, it will not take off vertically, but in the patrol version (2 AIM-9 + 2 AIM-120) it even takes off, and there are a lot of video confirmations on the network

[Errr]

With an oh-oh-very small refueling and, of course, without a combat load, the thrust-to-weight ratio of the F-35B is probably higher than 1,15, but this is only to demonstrate the possibility of vertical takeoff, as such, nothing more. After that, he just needs to hang a little over the site and sit back down. This is not for the real task. In this case, there can be no question of any patrolling.

[OgnennyiKotik]

F-35B takes off vertically, this is an indisputable confirmed fact. This opportunity is used for transportation and, for example, relocation from transport to AV or UDC.

[Errr]

Don't compare the F-35B to the Yak-38 and Sea Harrier. These are completely different machines. The brainchildren of the Yakovlevsky design bureau and British Aerospace are real vertical takeoff aircraft and landing. For them, vertical takeoff is normal mode... For the F-35B, this is simply the ability to briefly take off and land back without any flight. More careful with imagination.

[zlinn]

it is clear that vertical takeoff is only an option for very narrow needs, but nevertheless the f-35 is able to take off vertically from 3000 (2956) kg of total payload, if this is fuel, then it will be enough for 750-800 km of flight including takeoff and landing , and if there are still 800 kg of air-to-air missiles on it, then it will be able to fly around the mast for 35-40 minutes, but let it be half an hour, this is already something with a strong need, and consequently vertical take-off and short patrolling are trained, not too actively ( in this case, only two takeoffs), but still, the Yak-38 flew the same half an hour during vertical takeoff and was also almost unarmed

[Errr]

I love fantasy, but I try to curb it.
Let's go in order. The thrust-to-weight ratio of the Yak-38M is slightly more than 1,22 (to be exact, then 1, (2)). If you approach the F-35B with such a measurement, then its take-off weight during vertical takeoff should be no more than 19500: 1,22 = 15983 (kg). This is with the empty weight of the car at 14588 kg. From this it follows that in this situation, he will in no way be able to take with him more than 1395 kg of kerosene. And this is absolutely without ammunition. True, these almost 1,4 tons of fuel (almost 22% of the "full tank") can be enough for him to overcome about 367 kilometers, no more. Of course, given that the combat radius of the Yak-38M is no more than 195 km, the latter could not fly further than 390 kilometers in any way, but he did it routinely with full armament (2000 kg). And the F-35B in this situation will fly on its 367 km with a completely harmless bird. Such are the things.
In any case, thank you for expanding my knowledge. I learned new things for myself. Indeed, the F-35B is capable of a decent flight after vertical takeoff, but only unarmed.

[zlinn]

and still you have not read the material to the end, since a lift fan is used in the f-35, then it does not require a thrust of 1,22 on takeoff (just like on a helicopter, turboshaft engines in a purely turbojet design have a thrust much lower the weight of the helicopter, however, helicopters fly, and in general it is customary to operate with HP in TV engines, there, in addition to directly pushing the air down, the lifting force of the blades is also created, at the fan it is lower, but also quite tangible) I did not take the payload figure I gave from the ceiling from the statements of the lockheed, from which it turns out that the direct thrust of 1,07 is enough for takeoff, which does not look illogical with its layout, something like this

[Errr]

The F-35B lifting fan, during operation, takes away part of the power (in fact, thrust) from a single engine (there is nowhere else to get it). There, to put it vulgarly ( ), there is a redistribution of 19,5 tf of the total thrust of the F135 to four exhausts.

And the fan blades are not helicopter rotor blades. Even outwardly, this very fan is nothing more than a fan of a turbofan engine. Therefore, we shouldn't talk about the helicopter here at all. And the thrust-to-weight ratio of 1,22 for the F-35B here (with vertical takeoff) is very, very appropriate.
The blade of a helicopter propeller, in its essence, is a wing and other forces act there, namely those that create the lift of the aircraft wing during horizontal flight. There, of course, you can get by with a thrust several times less than the weight of the aircraft, but this is a completely different story. You're right here, it's just the words from another song.

[Gado]

In your pictures "Harier" and "Yak" -i. I don't see a single F-35. And this is your proof that the "F-35" takes off vertically? Or?

[Gado]

Here's proof, not yours.

[zlinn]

it was he, apparently, he gave an example of why this is generally needed (for example, for a flight from a dry cargo ship to an UDC)

[voyaka uh]

F-35B can take off:
1) from the springboard
2) a short take-off run from a flat deck
3) vertical take-off from a place.
In the latter case: with a small supply of fuel and subsequent refueling in the air.

[Errr]

Counted. Indeed, after a vertical takeoff, it can fly as much as 367 km with 22% fuel, but without a combat load.

[voyaka uh]

This is an emergency combat option. If you have to emergency land on the helipad of some destroyer or frigate.
And then fly to the aircraft carrier. And you can always grab a couple of small Sidewinder rockets.

[Errr]

Well, if only a couple of Sidewinders ... Don't top up a barrel of kerosene, and it's in the bag. Just think, it will fly a little less, only for some 53 kilometers. Trifle. In any case, it will fly away by as much as 314 km.

[grandfather_Kostya]

I did not understand how he chooses a point for landing - there is no downward view, and in case of gusts of wind, it is advisable not to slide to the edge of the deck.

[voyaka uh]

Sensors. Cameras. Landing is automatic. No special knowledge is required from the pilot.

[Runway]

Italy -1, Spain -1, France - 1, Britain -2, Japonia - 2 in perspective, Yuzhkory - 1 in perspective, incomprehensible Turks - 1, Yankees - 11.
Total: 18 steamers on the horizon of a five-year plan or two. Slightly less than our PLAT / APRK.
It makes no sense to consider the UDC as a base for ASW and AWACS and other "Japanese destroyers".
A bunch of go.

[Magog_]

Distribute this list according to the presence / absence of a catapult, and it will be clear which "steamers" will put pressure on China, and which on the NSR in Russia. Italian is apparently meant for us.

[Dmitry Izmalkov]

146% ready

[rocket757]

And so what ... they "work" according to their plan. We have our own plans.
Will disperse the sides and all business.