STOVL F-35B Ready To Begin Hover Pit Tests

[F-111 C/C]

That footage has been making the rounds and is actually from a computer video game and is not real.

[AVIATOR]

Gee F-111, another doubter like Shawn. You septic tanks are hard to convince. Bloody hell!
In fact the RAAF sent a team over there to evaluate the aircraft and one of the team, Squadron leader G [Ginger]Hebblethaite  showed the USAF delegation what the aircraft could do at an open day on board the USS Enterprise in May.
But you are partly right, the manoeuvre was later used in a computer game.

[shawn a]

First of all, Aviator, I've been to Australia. 2wice,-- no actually 3hree times. I've known a few Aussie surfers through the years, and have learned the hard way, (I bought a used car in Parramatta in 1969, and your police are probably still looking for me) that a true Aussie cannot (by nature) ever,ever tell it straight! (no offense, I love that attitude) Also I've never heard a true Aussie use the whole phrase "septic tanks", It's "seppo". Which makes me ask-- are you a native Aussie?
Oh, and I still consider the -35 to be a dog!
I know a few people at Lockheed, and I think I'll ask them to raise the price.
Shawn A

[AVIATOR]

[sigh] Shawn, I am from Perth on the West Coast and I have never heard of Seppos. It must be some slang from some scumbag place like Sydney, which is the capital of multiculturalism in Australia.
In Perth we are still blessed with a pure, Anglophile originated race that speaks English.

[shawn a]

Aviator,
I've been to Perth, and it truly is a nice place. I had hopes of going to Cape Naturaliste, and down to Cape Leeuwin, but had to jump ship. I lost something in Sydney.
Tell your government to join forces with the Japanese, and the Israelis, and hold out for the F-22.

[AVIATOR]

Australians have all lost something in Sydney. Our identity.

[shawn a]

Aviator,
Once again, my sony computer, microsoft, and the dial-up connection conspired to dissove my reply into the netherworld of cyberspace.
What I said was;
What I lost in Sydney begins with a "V".
My favorite town in Oz is Lightning Ridge, Coober Pedy is a close second, if you like the Martian terrain.
So- what is your opinion of the -35? Do you think it has capabilities above the -22?
I do not like the (expletive deleted) doors on the -35B, I would rather see a stealthy Harrier with rotating nozzles than all those doors and a clutched fan. Nozzles would seem to offer much less drag during the transition. The Harrier can go from 0 to 600 miles an hour in 60 seconds.
And who, really, is Ginger Hebblethaite? An old flame?
The -35B will blow a hole in anything other than reinforced concrete or steel during vertical landing
The only brilliance I see in the shaft arrangement is that it should, (and probably will be) used to produce electricity for HPM or directed energy weapons.

[AVIATOR]

Begins with a V? Well that was probably your jar of Vegemite. Any Aussie reading this will know how serious that is for us.
If your name was Captain W.E Johns you'd know who Ginger Hebblethaite is. Any Poms reading this will bear that out.
Now I have to own up here and admit that there are aeronautical engineers in the world that actually know more about the future of the F-35 Lightning than I do, but I have made one observation that is relevant.
Ever seen a rhinoceros beetle take off and those little doors open to let the wings out? Reminds me of those doors you are talking about.

I hope my answers have helped.

[shawn a]

Yes, Aviator, your answers have helped. I'll now refer to the F-35B as the Rhinoceros Beetle.
 So Ginger probably had red hair and freckles.
I'm sure the RAAF Rhino Beetles will have a small packet of Vegemite in the pilot's survival kit.
I just read that the R.B. can go from mach 0.8 to mach 1.2 in 61 seconds at 30,000 ft. It's top turning speed was stated as370 kt. at 9Gs and 15,000 ft. But it's sustained turn performance was mach 0.8 at 4.95 Gs, again at 15,000 ft. Thrust to weight was listed as 0.85 (to me, that's .85 lbs of thrust to 1 lb of weight) and a wing loading of 110 lbs per sq. ft. But Lockheed envisions the plane entering air to air combat with 40% of it's internal fuel, giving it a thrust to weight ratio of 1.09, and a wing loading of 83 lbs per sq. ft.
In a simulation program the Pentagon runs for air combat analysis, the R.B. "could achieve a loss-exchange ratio better than 400% against it's nearest competitor". That's according to Lockheed. I always thought a "ratio" implied a fraction- you know- one number over another.  "400%"  as a ratio seems to be obfuscatorial gobblydegook on the part of Lockheed, but to me it implies a 4/1 ratio. Of course the Beetle only carries 4 missles. After that-it better run!

[AVIATOR]

Gee mate, you guys built it. Where's the patriotism?

[Eldorado82]

indeed that video makes me think that was taken from a computer game. the pilot would endanger his own a*s and the aircraft in making so.

[F-111 C/C]

It IS from a video game. F-16.net has a whole forum about it, the name of the game it was taken from and everything. Much more convincing to me.