Fighter "F-35B". What journalists do not realize

30
Fighter "F-35B". What journalists do not realize


The other day, the naval forces together with the US marines held a show for journalists: the F-35B fighter was demonstrated, its takeoff and landing aboard the USS Wasp universal landing ship.

The F-35B made short-range takeoffs and vertical landings on the ship's deck, originally designed for helicopter-based helicopters.

The tests for Lockheed Martin were of particular importance, because even earlier, General Martin Dempsey, head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the United States Army, told Congress that the American army was not in a position to acquire all three versions of JSF. And the most suitable candidate for reductions for the Marine Corps is F-35B.

Without taking into account the positive feedback from journalists on the conducted demonstration flights, experts from the Center for Defense Information without much enthusiasm about the combat aircraft and the powerful ship saw a number of problems regarding the nuances of the F-35B refinement.

One of the nuances in the first place was the fact that two F-35B, which took part in demonstration flights, flew to Patuxent River for routine repairs, which USS Wasp technical personnel could not cope with. Apparently, the transfer of demonstration flights to the week was connected with this.

Immediately after the journalists left the airshow, one of the fighters under the number “BF-4” failed the drive of the flap fan gate, providing vertical thrust during takeoff and landing modes. There were already problems with this mechanism, however, as the developers stated, they have already been solved, but it turned out, not completely.

Despite the impression that the BF-4 was landing, very smooth and precise, the ship had to lower the speed below the planned one. The reason for this was the design of the ship, when it goes at high speed, air turbulences are created. They were calculated incorrectly. To aviation the incidents were completely ruled out; “Wasp” had to reduce his speed.

If we take into account that "F-35B" actually constantly pursue various problems, then due to the fact that budget allocations are reduced, it is most likely one of the most technically complex "F-35" with vertical takeoff and landing to get into mass production almost no chance. This is an insignificant loss for the American army - the Marines will be able to buy the F-35A for themselves with a standard landing and takeoff. Most of all can suffer the army of Great Britain. She plans to replace the Harrier attack aircraft with the F-35B fighter jets. The risk for the British military to remain out of work is extremely high: the JSF program has already surpassed all records in price increases. The total cost of the program over a ten-year period has reached more than 60 billion dollars. The 5 nuclear aircraft carriers of the Nimitz class together with the 700 F / A-18E / F fighter jets or, for example, the 150 very expensive fighters of the newest generation F-22 could have purchased for such money.
30 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Sergh
    -7
    29 October 2011 09: 02
    Eh, merikos, they would have scooped up our sushi and we didn’t count our turnips. This 35th surrendered, our Chk-141 was thrown into the trash a long time ago, an expensive toy, stupid.
    1. +17
      29 October 2011 11: 21
      This 35th surrendered, our Chk-141 was thrown into the trash a long time ago, an expensive toy, stupid.

      he was thrown into the trash not because of uselessness, but because of a lack of money, then a comrade from the Borkin administration handed over the technology as much as 141 for half a million bucks, although the amers considered that they would have gotten out of such a development in 3-5 billion bucks ...
      1. Sergh
        +4
        29 October 2011 15: 00
        Yes, Sasha, I understand you. And I know perfectly about the 141st, in the 90s a comrade was present at the tests, talked about this car. And the fact that some drawings were stolen and taken to the states were proved facts. There are even surnames. In short, the traitors then (90s) was the sea.
    2. Uncle Sam
      -21
      29 October 2011 21: 18
      141 is really only a garbage can
      1. +14
        29 October 2011 21: 58
        Yak 141 (before it was sold) managed to set 12 world records in climb and maximum flight altitude with a load of one and two tons, with test pilot Andrei Sinitsyn.



        By the time of climbing 12 km, the Yak - 141 was ahead of the British fighter VTOL “Harrier” by almost 10 seconds. Moreover, a record achievement was set in the warm season and with a load of 1 ton, and the Harrier took off without load in the winter, when the air density is highest, that is, under the most favorable conditions for the operation of the power plant.


        In the JSF, the entire flight system (take-off, flight in different modes, landing), i.e. the most significant (and the most painful) part for aircraft with GDP was successfully taken from Yak - 141



        the design of the F-35B largely repeats the Yak - 141. However, it has significant differences. On the Yak - 141, two turbojet engines were used to create vertical thrust. The use of a lifting fan on the F-35B allowed to reduce the loss of thrust of the main engine from the ingress of combustion products into the air intake and reduced the temperature load on the landing pad. The design of both aircraft have common drawbacks: during normal flight, the aircraft carries “dead weight” in the form of lifting units. They also take a significant amount for themselves inside the fuselage, where fuel tanks are usually located. The result of such design decisions is a significant reduction in flight range (F-35B from the entire 35-x series has the lowest flight range).
        1. Jaguar
          0
          29 October 2011 23: 23
          so write if lifting turbojet engines do not occupy volume and not dead weight
          1. +1
            29 October 2011 23: 30
            I agree, but then after all at Harrier
            1. Jaguar
              0
              30 October 2011 10: 19
              There is only one engine on the Harrier. I write that the lifting engines of the Yak-141 are also dead weight and occupy a volume due to which there is also a small radius of action
              1. Kassandra
                -1
                14 June 2014 09: 21
                141 radius is somehow more than Harrier's at times, do not be lazy look at the wiki or something
                1. 0
                  11 December 2017 06: 15
                  The power plant scheme was taken rather from the designed Yak-201. The sketch, by the way, is more similar in the case, the stealth was already laid there too. It seems that the lifting motors in 141 weighed less than the fan, but there was some other reason for the fan to be installed. Without Yakovlev’s Design Bureau Lockheed is unknown what would have produced. An example is his competitor in a competition from Boeing. (too lazy to search now, you will find yourself)
      2. kostya
        0
        30 October 2011 15: 34
        amers themselves cannot do anything worthwhile, because these are the scum of a society that fled from Europe in search of a better life.
        here we have, how many drawings were stolen, cool specialists were lured for their candy wrappers. and if it weren’t for the collapse of the Union, they would have built them, there wouldn’t be enough brains.
        And you Uncle Sam Wali there nefig here to scum the country in which you live
    3. Kassandra
      0
      14 June 2014 09: 24
      those 160 cut into perestroika under the supervision of the CIA ambassador to Ukraine were probably very useless too.
  2. ESCANDER
    0
    29 October 2011 09: 23
    Yes, obviously the British hurried.
    It was too early to discard their "Harrier" on the Pindos hoping.
    Now, problems with this “miracle” are taking root.
  3. Jaguar
    0
    29 October 2011 10: 43
    "The Marines will be able to buy an F-35A with a standard landing and takeoff." F-35C can still?
  4. -20
    29 October 2011 10: 49
    Well, he flies with them at least normally, but they cannot lift our T-50 from the ground.
    1. +5
      29 October 2011 11: 22
      our 141 norms also flew, and because of one accident, the entire program was curtailed.
    2. Sergh
      +5
      29 October 2011 15: 11
      Oleg, yes you calm down, what are you doing? From the window in Novosib I am watching Rusks 34th. Once or twice a month they’re already rising, I’ve taken a picture, but I don’t get here from the hard drive, I need to go through the back porch. Why, you took a position to crap everyone and immediately, I’ve been watching for a long time, you’re a normal man! Stay on one side, either for the reds or for the whites!
      1. +4
        29 October 2011 20: 11
        In every news I write purely my opinion, it does not matter whether the United States is discussing or Russia. I’m not in the war, especially since in the war no matter what the situation, I will fight for my homeland, and this is just a news site, so I discuss everything from a neutral position. As for the 34's crackers, these aren't planes of the 5 generation.
        1. Gur
          +5
          31 October 2011 09: 12
          You are so artfully disguised as decent .. tobish as not dependent .. only here is your independence .. some kind of one-sided .. So:
          India abandoned Mi in favor of Apache
          "Joker October 27, 2011 09:22 -25 Something patriots are silent ...
          Didn’t like it?
          Now :
          Well, he flies with them at least normally, but they cannot lift our T-50 from the ground.
          Are you and your motherland determined? Patriotic you are our ....
          1. 0
            31 October 2011 09: 30
            I am flattered of course that you are watching and worrying about me. I am on the news site and do not take any side, just express my opinion.
    3. +3
      30 October 2011 01: 01
      Well, what a child, go to YouTube and see how they fly.
      1. 0
        30 October 2011 01: 48
        How does anyone fly?
        1. +4
          30 October 2011 10: 43
          Pancake, JokerWell, don’t be dumb .. ah ..! - PAK-FA had only one non-staff case (as far as I know) with the engine, and then nothing happened to the engine ... - you’re for objectivity ..... come on .... shuruy ... study in YouTube ... !!!
          1. -2
            30 October 2011 23: 55
            Yes, I have nothing to do. At PAK FA, the engine is still not new, they tested it with the old engine.
            1. +1
              31 October 2011 09: 10
              so if it’s not a new engine, but an old reliable installation snorted, why yell horror horror ???
            2. 0
              19 March 2012 12: 29
              Joker October 30, 2011 23:55 p.m. -1
              Yes, I have nothing to do. The engine is still not new at PAK FA, we tested it with the old engine

              Give a link where it says that the old engine is on the PAXFA. And by the way, which of the old ones? where is he still standing?
  5. Anatoly
    +1
    29 October 2011 11: 21
    It looks like another failed PR campaign. You can advertise any high-tech toy, but this will not make it the best.
  6. +1
    29 October 2011 13: 33
    The likelihood that he will still be brought to mind is still there. And all the pendos should think about corruption, kickbacks and overvaluation in their defense industry, you see and the price drops by a couple of dozen cartoons .....
  7. +1
    29 October 2011 14: 43
    I’ll need a whole research institute to fix it. And what will they do if they beat him up?
  8. +3
    29 October 2011 15: 08
    ..I am amazed how you are seriously discussing here that the F-35 trash ....... believe it yourself ??
    amers will bring it to mind and they will, as in all NATO, have a single exterminator.
    the dough is actually still chopped on supplies to the allies.

    .find the opinion of at least one specialist that F-35 is garbage .. (as they say here)

    And the implementation of the idea of ​​one exterminator in three versions .... really has no analogues in the world and is unique ... (as our military likes to say)
    1. ESCANDER
      +2
      29 October 2011 20: 31
      rumpeljschtizhen
      --- "And the implementation of the idea of ​​one fighter in three versions has no analogues in the world and is unique ..."

      And who is arguing? Only you tell the English to them, otherwise they started to get nervous.
      1. Uncle Sam
        -12
        29 October 2011 21: 21
        Yes, they have everything exactly, it’s our clown’s patriotic gut
      2. Kassandra
        0
        14 June 2014 09: 30
        lock on the Yak-141 from which the F35B is licked or on the nozzle harrier and also get the option
        rivet hook - you get another option. but why? probably this is not the main thing, but the fact that the F-16 does not sit upright will not be taught that it is not riveted to it :-)
        in 1992 they had to bow to the USSR.
        and before that the AV-8 was also skipped by the British - it was generally not licensed.
    2. Kassandra
      0
      14 June 2014 09: 34
      It has no analogues that it is officially licked by the Americans with the Yak-141, a likely enemy.
      opinions of experts on the Internet already exist (Pierre Spray)
      I didn’t hold it at all because you go to the topwar, you type F35 in the search - it gives 3500 results, and you type Yak-141 - only 280.
  9. mind1954
    0
    30 October 2011 01: 47
    Actually, as history shows, the more specialized
    the more effective. Well, they stole the Yak-141, but what about the engine, no one
    doesn’t remember him, it seems, too ...?!
  10. CARTRIDGE
    +2
    30 October 2011 19: 23
    Okay, brains are leaking abroad, this is their choice, but why should the enemies sell technology! The Yak-141 is a promising fighter that could be based on the Mistral UDC and such a combination compensated for the lack of AV.
  11. +3
    30 October 2011 20: 52
    The good news is that not only do we have problems with the production of new weapons, but also our probable partners.
  12. jamert
    +3
    31 October 2011 11: 33
    Most likely to suffer army Great Britain. She plans to replace the Harrier attack aircraft with F-35B fighters.


    Firstly, it’s still not the army but the fleet and the Air Force.
    Secondly, Harriers were decommissioned last year due to the high cost of maintenance and uselessness. And the British will receive the F-35 in any case not earlier than 2018, like the new aircraft carrier for their base. For the conventional Air Force, England also has a Tornado and Typhoons.
    Thirdly, last year the British decided to abandon the F-35V in favor of the usual deck modification - the F-35S
  13. newvidimka
    0
    18 February 2012 19: 20
    Pontogon also loves cuts and kickbacks.