PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - No cats and flaps ...... back to F35B?
View Single Post
Old 14th May 2012, 22:04
  #859 (permalink)  
kbrockman
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in the magical land of beer and chocolates
Age: 53
Posts: 506
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
re post 849 ,Peter we, Excuse me for the late response but I didn't think this thread would go so quickly,

As for a link, I will look it up but I remember reading about this issue on a Dutch engineering forum where they quoted from this article, I believe;
JSF ski jump tests due in 2011 - Jane's Defence Weekly
which stated that;
JSF ski jump tests due in 2011, EUROPE


'Ski jump' trials of the Lockheed Martin F-35B Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter are expected to take place in 18 months' time at US Naval Air Station (NAS) Patuxent River in Maryland.
The question was why it didn't happen yet, seeing that testing is supposed to go rather smoothly and someone who is in a position to know stated that possible Gear problems when used with the Ramp was the reason for the delay.

Also the 13° stems from the Navantia designed carriers both used by the RAN and the Armada Espaņola, 2 likely future F35B clients (certainly the Spanish).


Also as an aside, I don't know if there is any trueth in it (only read about it in a keypublishing-forum thread years ago) but supposedly the real reason the MARINES didn't opt for the Ski-jump was political iso operational.
It did have something to do with the effect it could have on the perceived necessity for large CATOBAR carriers for the NAVY and the argument of deck polution was more used as a rather convenient excuse, which sounds logical as it wouldn't be too hard to imagine a small extension at the bow functioning as a ski-jump without intruding on the available helicopter spaces.

Even more logical if you realize that the newest America class will get even more F35B's on a regular base vs AV8B's on the older ships adding to the importance of fixed wing ops on an otherwise MARINE landing ship (and V22's which could also benefit from it, I would guess).
Any thrueth to this, anybody knows more about the real reason(s) ?




Last remark/question, wasn't the ,nearly completed, Graf zeppelin carrier supposed to have 2 slighty upward sloping CAT's to help improve launch performance, sort of the first (albeit modest) ski-jumpish aided performance tool ?

Last edited by kbrockman; 14th May 2012 at 22:08.
kbrockman is offline