F-35B Lightning II Vertical Landing on USS Wasp

Mar 7, 2018 6:47 PM

Thund3rbolt

Views

105324

Likes

1282

Dislikes

33

A detachment of F-35B Lightning II's from Fighter Attack Squadron 121 (VMFA-121) arrived aboard the USS Wasp, marking the first time the jet has deployed aboard a Navy ship and with a Marine Expeditionary Unit in the Indo-Asian-Pacific

https://streamable.com/yv6o6

Cool. Did it kill its pilot like the rest of the F35s have been?

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Trillion dollars later...

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 5

Did it stop killing the pilots?

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Damn, and I thought I was good at parallel parking.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Ayee. My old squadron.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Anyone want to make a joke about how this overpriced piece of shit is an overpriced piece of shit?

8 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 11

That'll be 10 billion $,please.

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 4

I helped making the engines!

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Hate this mission on GTAV

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It looks like a plane, but it clearly identifies as an attack helicopter

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Jumpy McJump Jet

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Left the hood open.

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

[deleted]

[deleted]

8 years ago (deleted Aug 9, 2022 9:53 PM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

It's a cover for the VTOL fan. It opens up to allow air to get sucked through and accelerated downwards.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Goddamn. That thing looked like it was being lowered from a crane.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

So I've read that it's expected to fly for 55 years? Would there still be piloted aircraft then? We have drones now; stealth ones too.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I have a question: Which is better looking, F-22 or F-35A/B?

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I like the f-22 look, it has a 'sleeker' design. Plus those sqare nozzles. Apples to oranges though, JSF has many more roles to fill.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Thats just fucking coooooool as shit

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Fake n gay

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Fun fact, the f-35 can only land on 2 out of the 8 or so landing spots on the ship or else it melts the deck

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

You can tell where they replaced the deck with new by the deeper black

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I mean, you can't fuel the damn thing in direct sunlight, but sure, this is cool.

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

Beautiful

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

That's ridiculous! We have ships based on people's race and religion now!?!

8 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 1

I'm... confused. Also, how is this comment older than the post?

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

White Anglo-Saxon Protestant.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Former marine infantry, did a deployment on the wasp. That thing is... pretty ancient.

8 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 0

You guys get the old shit, you know how this works.

8 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

Vintage

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Well did you expect the DOD to give the Marines a nice new ship just so they could draw all over the walls with crayons?

8 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

That’s a mischaracterization. We draw cocks in permanent marker. Crayons are for eating.

8 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 0

Hey! I work in the facility where this fifth generation fighter is assembled

8 years ago | Likes 22 Dislikes 2

Hey if you’re not full of shit you probably just broke a security protocol

8 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 2

Negative. I didn't say I worked for lockheed Martin Fort Worth, Texas Aeronautics facilities department in building number 005. Well shit...

8 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

What up from a fellow Building 5er. Nice proximity to the 50' Aisle

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Should. . . Should. We get lunch someday and like. Hangout? Do people do that?

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Hey! I just watched a gif of that fighter

8 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 0

Note to viewers: Stop listening to paid gadflys like Pierre Sprey who never really designed an aircraft and is full of shit. The F-35 is a

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtZNBkKdO5U Related: This is a great video series on the F-35. It's a terrifying machine

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

damn good jet. Go look at the performance reviews from its Red Flag operations. It kills F-15s and goes on to take out latest gen SAMs

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

(simulated) in the same mission. No previous aircraft could ever think of doing that.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Russia's new Vertical Landing prototype: https://thumbs.gfycat.com/FavorableNextHarrier-size_restricted.gif

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Funnily enough technology in the F-35B was in part based on the Yak 141. Lockmart was buying tech from Russia after the fall of the USSR.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Favourable Next Harrier? Gfycat is secretly run by armchair admirals, methinks.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I really hope this plane turns out to be worth the money we paid for it. Doubt it ever could be.

8 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 3

I mean that's the thing about deterrence: if you don't see it doing any actual fighting, it could still be doing its job.

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

I think the comment is more about wasteful procurement policies. The same plane or better could've been developed for less money.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

(Which is hilarious because the plane it was built to counter was built to counter a prototype bomber the USAF built that never served)

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Ironically, you could say the EXACT thing about the F-15. It was built to counter a threat that never actually existed.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Yes but the F35 is built in multiple states to the point where the parts have to be custom fitted when they get to assembly.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

That and last time i checked a lot of pilots don't want to fly it. Some were getting sick because of the glue they were using.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Eh - every conference I've been to, the air force chiefs said they loved the F35 and that David Axe's condemnation article was v inaccurate.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Ahhh...I was specifically talking about the F-15 being built to counter the MiG-25 Foxbat, which we THOUGHT was fast and agile. It wasn't.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Hey! I wrote and tested controls code for this aircraft!

8 years ago | Likes 358 Dislikes 3

I feel like that's not something you're supposed to share...

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

[deleted]

[deleted]

8 years ago (deleted Mar 8, 2018 3:49 AM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

People who test code aren't making a lot of money

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Developers test their code....

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Yah but they also don't earn a shit tonne

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I designed linear actuator control systems to glue the fuselage halves together. Yay nerds!

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Are there any bugs in your code?

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Let me guess - it's a million lines of spaghetti codes with no comments. Let's how you wills stay employed for the next 20 years.

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Nah, everything was tested and documented relentlessly

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Noice!

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

How often did you go "whoops, that killed me." In testing?

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I don't think I would ever code aircraft software. I've seen some bugs I've created in the past. I would kill so many people...

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Hello fellow LM person

8 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 1

Design here, nice to see an Imgur post I can relate to.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

That is dope as fuck!

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Can you of giving me more information? I is not of russian

8 years ago | Likes 43 Dislikes 0

Of Polan?

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Hell the Chinese already stole multiple databases of information on the F-35.

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Rush B.

8 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 0

Suka

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

DO A STORY PLEASE

8 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 1

I have a friend who tells me things. I will try to get something I can post.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Not much to tell. the actual job was very boring, just testing code on a big simulator. I did get to do a field trip one day to the (1)

8 years ago | Likes 22 Dislikes 0

2 test stands. Got to watch them fire the chicken gun into a giant rolls royce engine the size of a house

8 years ago | Likes 22 Dislikes 0

That's story worthy.

8 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 0

Very cool ...so is the landing all computer controlled and fully automatic?

8 years ago | Likes 105 Dislikes 0

Whole plane is computer controlled. Once slow enough the throttle becomes the forward/backward (yes!) control. Stick forward/aft is up/down.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Vertical landing is computerized. With four different thrust points to control plus wind, it's a much easier job that way.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Not sure, didn't work on any of that. I think the pilot may have a couple options. I wanna say it's mostly manual

8 years ago | Likes 85 Dislikes 0

[deleted]

[deleted]

8 years ago (deleted Mar 8, 2018 4:54 PM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

That's not the cockpit, its called the lift fan. It provides the vertical thrust near the front of the plane

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

That's not the cockpit, it's a propeller compartment to assist in vertical stability.

8 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 0

That's not the cockpit that is open. That is where the the hatch that allows for the VTOL engine be utilized.

8 years ago | Likes 33 Dislikes 0

F35 isn't vtol, it's stovl. That hatch houses a massive fan that allows vertical landings..when it works!

8 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

Love the F35. It's a dope aircraft.

8 years ago | Likes 26 Dislikes 8

I just hate when they want to make noise. Silent as fuck when they want but when hovering, oh jebus.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

My heart will always be with the Harrier.

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

If the F35B is anything, it's leaps and bounds better then the harrier.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Its insane cost overruns cancel out many of its benefits. Buying 3x as many single purpose aircraft would be better than having extremely1/2

8 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 0

expensive jack of all trades aircraft that isn't the best at anything 2/2

8 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

That would help jack shit for the Allies of the US who lack the budgets and manpower for maintaining several types of aircraft.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Maintaining several types of aircraft is cheaper than maintaining the F-35. Many US allies have turned down the F-35 for that reason.

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

The whole pointis having a stealth jet, the fact that even 30+ year old jets can fuck it up doesn‘t really matter then to the military

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

One itty bitty innovation in radar technology and its stealth is instantly worthless though.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Probably, that didn‘t come around since the Sr-71 tho. It could be a few decades, or a few years

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

SR-71 wasn't even stealthy when it came out, though. The engine plumes always had a massive radar return.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Also, the F-35 first flew twelve years ago and the design vehicle 18 years ago. They've already HAD two decades.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It has a few ...issues.

8 years ago | Likes 27 Dislikes 5

All new tech has issues. IMO it would be more worrying if there weren't any.

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

I want to know the issues plz

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

It's worse than the aircraft it's supposed to replace. But 20 times as expensive.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 5

The program is an absolute shitshow. Whether it's actually worse or not remains to be seen.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

That's a bit of a misconception. It's not meant to outright replace the F-22. It's meant as a multirole rather than a pure fighter.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

And the f18 is a multirole too which beat the f35 in combat tests

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

No

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

How is it worse? Its faster, more manuverable and carries more ordinance than the A10.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

No Brrrrrrrrrtttt.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 3

Replaces multiroles lile f18-> sucks so much in air combat it loses to f18s. The only good thing about it is stealth

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

VMFA-121never flew A10. This replaces the F/A 18. And for NATO allies, the F16.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Time will tell ultimately but the problem right now is its a giant compromise. Its not just replacing the A10 but also the F15, F16,

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

AKA the feature that never should have been forced into the F-35, which fucked up the rest of the design and development program.

8 years ago | Likes 95 Dislikes 11

The F-35 is the reason why we need to kill the Military Industrial Complex

8 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 13

Why do most things well when you can do everything poorly and for 10x the cost?!

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Um, VTOL was a pretty integral design requirement from the very beginning of the JSF Contest.

8 years ago | Likes 18 Dislikes 5

No, look earlier in the history. The JSF program was created by a shotgun wedding of the Marines CALF program and USAF & Navy's JAST program

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

Those two programs should never have been merged, it forced too many bad design compromises. It's the #1 reason it's been such a clusterfuck

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

The very idiotic dream (&promise) of having a single platform serve each branch which had very different mission parameters and specs.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Hey guys, let's adapt this tank for Air Force use! :D

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

And made it an overpriced underpowered piece of shit

8 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 11

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtZNBkKdO5U Nah, it's pretty fucking rock solid

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Overpriced? Not really.

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 5

It is based on its capabilities. The current Gen fighter shouldn't be that shitty at a higher cost than the European equivalent.

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 3

What European equivalent is there?

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

In what aspects is it underpowered?

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

The navy version is said to be sluggish compared to other carrier based aircraft

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

The F-35c's max load TWR is ~.61. The F/A-18E/F's is ~.66 with similar fuel loads. They also have the same (listed) max speed of mach 1.6

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Speed ≠ sluggishness. It's unmanuvarable, plain and simple.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Man, it's that or build full-sized carriers for the USMC. The STOVL's been a pain in the arse, but it's also supposed to give the Corps

8 years ago | Likes 19 Dislikes 0

They could've stuck with the original plan & gave the Marines a dedicated VTOL. Would've been more effective, & probably cheaper in the end.

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

their own organic air support instead of having to have Nimitzes at their beck and call. As an air combatant, it's pretty shit, especially

8 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 0

for the price tag, but as a harrier replacement it's the plane the USMC's been having wet dreams about. At the expense of everyone else.

8 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 1

You're not fucking kidding

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the vert system only for the USMC variation?

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Yes, but even having it as option still required major compromises in the overall design of the aircraft, outside the STOVL feature itself.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Details please

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Long -> short: Big fan in middle (big hole) makes airframe difficult to be sturdy enough. Plane gets heavy, overcomplicated, expensive.

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Also forced commonality between the variants for the different branches meant it was difficult to make it good at any one thing.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Ironically enough I've only heard this criticism from comments on imgur.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Compared with being better at a few (2)

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

There is criticism in the aerospace community. Pretty much the requirements caused it to be so-so at many things (1)

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I'll see if I can't find you the systems engineering case study...

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Apparently can't do it now because all my school files are on my work computer.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0