- #1
jostpuur
- 2,112
- 19
Looks peculiar. How does that plane maintain zero torque with the main engine so far behind?
Last edited by a moderator:
First F-35B Night Vertical Landing
- Thread starter jostpuur
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Vertical
Click For Summary
Discussion Overview
The discussion revolves around the mechanics and implications of the F-35B's night vertical landing capabilities, focusing on its thrust vectoring, stabilization mechanisms, and operational considerations. Participants explore both the technical aspects and the practical effects of its design in various scenarios.
Discussion Character
- Technical explanation
- Exploratory
- Debate/contested
Main Points Raised
- One participant questions how the F-35B maintains zero torque with its main engine positioned far behind the aircraft.
- Another participant notes the visibility of the main thruster's exhaust in night vision and expresses curiosity about the other thrusters' performance, suggesting they may not be weak.
- A detailed explanation is provided regarding the aircraft's stabilization mechanisms, including a vertical lift fan and roll nozzles, which contribute to pitch and roll stability.
- Concerns are raised about the operational effectiveness of the F-35B's landing method, particularly regarding debris and potential damage to landing surfaces due to the afterburner during vertical landings.
- Comparisons are made to the Harrier, with one participant expressing that the F-35B resembles a more advanced version of that aircraft.
Areas of Agreement / Disagreement
Participants express a mix of appreciation for the aircraft's capabilities and concerns about its operational implications. There is no clear consensus on the effectiveness of its landing method or the implications of its design features.
Contextual Notes
Some technical aspects remain unexplored, such as the specific performance metrics of the thrust vectoring and lift mechanisms. The discussion also does not resolve the potential impact of debris during landings on various surfaces.
Who May Find This Useful
Aerospace engineers, military aviation enthusiasts, and individuals interested in advanced aircraft design and operational strategies may find this discussion relevant.
Looks peculiar. How does that plane maintain zero torque with the main engine so far behind?
- #2
berkeman
Admin
- 69,531
- 25,110
Very cool, thanks. 
- #3
jostpuur
- 2,112
- 19
I'm glad you appreciate the cool video 
And concerning my question, well I know that the main thruster is probably not the only thruster, but I still think that looks peculiar. The main thruster is only one whose exhaust glows in that night vision, and strangely the other ones, not visible, don't appear to be very weak either...
And concerning my question, well I know that the main thruster is probably not the only thruster, but I still think that looks peculiar. The main thruster is only one whose exhaust glows in that night vision, and strangely the other ones, not visible, don't appear to be very weak either...
- #4
Travis_King
- 886
- 34
If you look at this picture:
you see that in addition to the rear nozzle which is capable of thrust vectoring through basically 90+ degrees (horizontal and vertical) it also has a vertical lift fan (driven by the main engine) just aft of the cockpit which stabalizes the pitch of the craft. There are also roll nozzles toward the wing roots which stabilize, well, roll.
That flap(s) on top allows air to enter the lift fan when required.
As to your other point, the rear is seen because it's very hot, as compared to the fan exhaust. Both have very high velocities and volumes, but the forward fan jet (thrust) isn't nearly as hot as the combustion exhaust from the rear.
you see that in addition to the rear nozzle which is capable of thrust vectoring through basically 90+ degrees (horizontal and vertical) it also has a vertical lift fan (driven by the main engine) just aft of the cockpit which stabalizes the pitch of the craft. There are also roll nozzles toward the wing roots which stabilize, well, roll.
That flap(s) on top allows air to enter the lift fan when required.
As to your other point, the rear is seen because it's very hot, as compared to the fan exhaust. Both have very high velocities and volumes, but the forward fan jet (thrust) isn't nearly as hot as the combustion exhaust from the rear.
Last edited by a moderator:
- #5
nsaspook
Science Advisor
- 1,560
- 5,162
Looks like a fancy Harrier.
Some views of the forward fan during takeoff and landing.
Some views of the forward fan during takeoff and landing.
Last edited by a moderator:
- #6
etudiant
Gold Member
- 1,239
- 128
The video is a great illustration of the pros and cons of this VSTOL version.
On the one hand, the airplane will do a rolling take off with a good payload if a runway is available and land on a patch of land if no runway remains. Very good for survivability.
On the other hand, the landing involves an afterburner pointing straight down, which ensures a cloud of rocks and debris will get blasted all around the aircraft. In fact, unless the plane has a ceramic patch to land on even on a ship, I think it would melt the deck steel. Does that make for operational effectiveness?
On the one hand, the airplane will do a rolling take off with a good payload if a runway is available and land on a patch of land if no runway remains. Very good for survivability.
On the other hand, the landing involves an afterburner pointing straight down, which ensures a cloud of rocks and debris will get blasted all around the aircraft. In fact, unless the plane has a ceramic patch to land on even on a ship, I think it would melt the deck steel. Does that make for operational effectiveness?