I recently watched the last episode of the QE and there were trials involving a Civvy, ex-RAF/RN test pilot doing SRVL. A first wave off, followed by a very precise SRVL and stopping within the distance. Views from the cockpit as well as from Flyco. Later they indicated that trials were to continue using a weapons load.

Very, very impressive and a world first for the RN/QE .

SVRL


IG

Prolly "Whizzer" Wilson! I think he's been the lead BAE TP for the UK Embarked Ops F35 programme for some time. I'd hope he was good as he has lived and breathed F35 RN Ops for a while now as you can see from links such as https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-n...ght-test-f-35b

It's working up the Ship/Sqdn "Shag" capability that may take more time ... but probably not much more time. Depends when the capability itself is cleared for use operationally and then the massed Stovies can let rip to individually qual in the SRVL (I think "V"s and "R"s have been mixed up in some posts - it's "Shipborne Rolling Vertical Landing" (I had to check that myself!)). Anyway, I believe that will be the route.

As for the first use, and someone will correct me, I'm sure I recall a sort of SRVL which the SHARs could use if push came to a shove in an emergency. My memory is a bit (OK, very!) hazy but I seem to recall Step 1 of the procedure was to clear the flight deck of everything else given how small the CVSs were. You could leave something spotted directly ahead of the island but all the rest had to be clear, either downstairs or in the air. Now, those familiar with the CVS will testify that could be quite an undertaking given the lack of space down below. And it was a "last resort" "cunning plan" IIR. How quickly the memory fades - so I could be talking rubbish ... again. But happy to call the F35 "SRVL" a first as far as a "routine" process which I understand it will be.

Finally, as an aside, I still cringe when I hear the "Top Gun" use of things like "Whizzer" tho! It's so ... erm ... 1986! If you have to, but "Whizzer"??? There must be a more "appropriate/gung ho" play on the name "Wilson"! You get young boys (and girls too - just to remain PC) shooting "Whizzers" found in cheap Christmas Crackers across the dining room on Christmas Day. Hardly a "daring-do" TP image! Probably a really great guy and undoubtedly a spot-on TP - but "Whizzer"? Still beats what I suspect most people would call me.......!

And on that note ...... hat, coat .... :ooh: H 'n' H

...and short clip showing the actual:

Just watch out for the musical din...


From 3:30 onwards

Interesting that the bring back with vertical is 5000 lbs, while with rolling it is 7000 lbs + additional fuel.
It does not seem to me to be such a significant difference?

IG

Translate one ton of expensive complex weapons into financial value and you might have a different PoV.

It is not only the cash benefit, but the non- loss of an item of which the ship has a limited supply. If we were still reliant on iron bombs and had several magazines full of them then maybe throwing them away is tolerable. The same is not true of, say, AIM 120 or something even newer.

N

The aircraft used for the tests were instrumented. Perhaps it’s not unreasonable to speculate that the data gathered will be used to develop an SRVL version of Raytheon’s JPALS.
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/ar...-enter-457458/

When is the first full naval squadron of F-35's going to be ready?

The result of 5 seconds Google-Fu:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/809_Naval_Air_Squadron
https://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/our-org...l-air-squadron

If you're talking about the UK, no such thing. The plan AIUI is for all squadrons to be joint-manned irrespective of numberplate.

If you're talking about "Navy" squadrons VFA101 has been and gone.

Cheers Mogwi! I was not dreaming it then! :ok: Phew! I was starting to think I'd lost the plot (even more than usual!) and was making that up in my post at #5725! I was fairly sure it was talked about as an option which could be used if required but I don't recall it being needed, at least not during any of my times on the CVSs.

Sad but true, apparently, particularly in the wake of the black hole induced by the carrier gap (remember the late Kristian Ward's altercation with David Cameron in Oct 2010 about being 'sacked'?).

UK Military Flying Training – heading for the cliff-edge?

Thanks guys - over three years then - assuming as you say they can train enough pilots

The latest " World Naval Review" repeats that the RAF are aiming to stop F-35B numbers at 48 and order F-35A for the bulk of the remaining "requirement"

i think the most remarkable thing about that old chesnut is the clear deliniation between the RAF/MOD, where you never hear it from anyone above Leading Cadet in the ATC, and the internet warrior world where you hear it all the time.

in land based operations the A has a number on undeniable advantages over the B - but in the defence bigger picture, the advantages than an all B fleet has: training and logistics, as well as the ability to surge an almost endless number of B's and B air and ground crew to/through the carriers - massively outweigh the advantages (range and internal carriage of a 2000lb class weapon) that the A has over the B.

everyone in the RAF understands that, and has understood that for years.

WNR is a pretty respected annual publication - I'm sure they talk to people above Leading Cadet in the ATC, and the internet warrior world.............

Is there a specific reason why SRVL was only used on Sea Harrier in an emergency, rather than as a routine procedure as is planned for F-35B? Was it just unnecessary, or was it thought about but aircraft/ship were unsuitable?

While not involved in formal discussions on the topic (being a simple humble Spanners) I think it was down to deck logistics. The aft end was always full of SHARs ranged round the aft deck, tails over the oggin. To do a SRVL would, from my memories, have involved clearing the deck. The new carriers are much wider, presumably designed with SRVL or even CTOL in mind. Don't forget, IIR, the CVS was originally to support RW only. The fact the SHAR appeared was one of those decisions back in the early '70's when the full impact of the demise of the old Ark Royal with the F4 was realised. Before my time that discussion! Others may/will know more! Once at sea with the SHAR, the practical limitations vis-a-vie returning to Mum with any payload were fully realised and the F35 SRVL requirement was probably derived from that experience. Lesson learned? For once, looks that way! Cheers, H 'n' H

Definitely, the deskspace was designed to allow for an angled deck if they had pursued the CATOBAR option