What Makes The F-35B Stealth Fighter So Special

[PeteS in CA]

What Makes The F-35B Stealth Fighter So Special

https://www.19fortyfive.com/2021/03/what-makes-the-f-35b-stealth-fighter-so-special/

Then there is the F-35B, which is similar in size to the F-35A variant. However, the F-35B sacrifices about a third of its fuel volume to accommodate its shaft-driven lift fan (SDLF), which allows it to land vertically like a helicopter and take-off from very short runways. The system, which was developed by Rolls-Royce, is a descendant of the Pegasus engine 11-61/F402-RR-408, the most powerful version which is used in the Harrier AV-8B.
...
The ILFPS allows the F-35B to operate from austere or short-field bases as well as a range of air-capable ships near front-line combat zones. It can still take off and land conventionally from longer runways. A downside of this capability is that the LiftSystem components are essentially dead weight during flight and as a result, the aircraft has a smaller internal weapons bay and also carries less internal fuel. However, the F-35B uses the probe-and-drogue method for aerial refueling.

The F-35B does two big things. It puts a modern supersonic fighter on amphibious assault ships, effectively making them light carriers. It puts a modern supersonic fighter into operating environments that had been limited to helicopters.

[Smokin Joe]

Seems like being capable of landing and taking off vertically would enable these aircraft to 'pop down' anywhere they had the ability to spool up and go, letting them wait until they were needed with the right supplies moved inland. Resupply could be done anywhere they could land...

[SZonian]

One minor nit with this; The lift fan system incorporated in the B was NOT developed by RR.  A Lockheed engineer did. 

Dude's a damned genius.

[SZonian]

Seems like being capable of landing and taking off vertically would enable these aircraft to 'pop down' anywhere they had the ability to spool up and go, letting them wait until they were needed with the right supplies moved inland. Resupply could be done anywhere they could land...

They can go short or vertical...lots of flexibility.  The aircraft basically lands itself with minimal pilot input.

[Hoodat]

Looking back at WWII, which fighter would you choose if you could only have one?

[Smokin Joe]

Looking back at WWII, which fighter would you choose if you could only have one?

P-47

[PeteS in CA]

P-47

Choosing just one means looking at the balance of raw performance, firepower, range, ruggedness, and flexibility. IMO, the P-47 does well in all, except in range (compared to the P-51). The P-47 was used quite a bit for CAS and light attack.

The F4U Corsair looks to be a good balance of factors, though the P-51's range was considerably greater and its performance similar. Fighter technology evolved pretty quickly before and during WW2. Models that were front-line in 1941 were obsolescent mid-war (e.g. the F4F and P-40). The Corsair and Mustang came a bit later and their performance was greater. For sheer accomplishment the F6F Hellcat was tops, but the F4U's performance was greater. Though obsolescent, the F4F (FM4, IIRC) continued use in escort carriers, due to the F4F's smaller size and mostly adequate performance.

Enough blather ... were I choosing for long range escort, the P-51 was better. For flexibility, the F4U. The P-38 and P-47, respectively, would be my runners up for those two roles.

[Hoodat]

And my point, one-size-fits-all doesn't work.

[Smokin Joe]

Choosing just one means looking at the balance of raw performance, firepower, range, ruggedness, and flexibility. IMO, the P-47 does well in all, except in range (compared to the P-51). The P-47 was used quite a bit for CAS and light attack.

The F4U Corsair looks to be a good balance of factors, though the P-51's range was considerably greater and its performance similar. Fighter technology evolved pretty quickly before and during WW2. Models that were front-line in 1941 were obsolescent mid-war (e.g. the F4F and P-40). The Corsair and Mustang came a bit later and their performance was greater. For sheer accomplishment the F6F Hellcat was tops, but the F4U's performance was greater. Though obsolescent, the F4F (FM4, IIRC) continued use in escort carriers, due to the F4F's smaller size and mostly adequate performance.

Enough blather ... were I choosing for long range escort, the P-51 was better. For flexibility, the F4U. The P-38 and P-47, respectively, would be my runners up for those two roles.

One of the reasons for the P-47 (which did serve in escort roles) was its ability to absorb punishment as well, which made it a winner for CAS. Properly outfitted with an external drop tank, they also flew escort missions. The P-51 was described as a sweet aircraft, and easy to fly, the F-4U not so. The P-47 fell somewhere in between, The airfoil geometry of the P-51 was different, and that, coupled with the Merlin engine gave it a speed advantage over other aircraft. The P-51 probably had the best overall rating, and definitely the most kills of any allied plane credited, but there were other planes which performed workhorse duty as well. As an all around aircraft (which incorporates a series of trade-offs) I still like the Jug. The p-38 did well in the Pacific after Lindbergh and others sorted out problems with the aircraft and worked out tactics against the Japanese, and had the bonus of having a second engine, always nice over water. Another few worth mention are the Supermarine Spitfire (possibly the most eye pleasing aircraft design, ever), Hawker Hurricane, and the DeHaviland Mosquito, the latter being constructed of wood with virtually no radar signature.

(Note that we have confined our choices to Allied planes, leaving the Me Bf-09, FW 190, and Me 262 out of the discussion. Though the latter was only used in the later part of the war (too late to have sustained service and effect), it had the potential to be a game-changer, had Hitler not ordered it to be configured as a bomber in 1941)

[Smokin Joe]

And my point, one-size-fits-all doesn't work.

Nope, it doesn't. My pick was based on best all around performance, not necessarily the best at any one thing, but rating well in all skill sets.

[Hoodat]

Nope, it doesn't. My pick was based on best all around performance, not necessarily the best at any one thing, but rating well in all skill sets.

We can all argue that point.  Life is full of trade-offs, and that applies to military aircraft as well.  Each plane has its advantages and disadvantages.  And depending on each scenario, the preferable plane may not be the same each time.  Which is why I have a problem with the F-35.  There's a reason the Navy doesn't deploy F-16s on carriers, just as there is a reason the Air Force hates A-10s.

Back to WWII, the original P-51 was not a good plane.  Only after it was refitted with the RR Merlin did it achieve its status as a premier fighter.  Consider also that there were several competitors making their own planes.  If the military had exclusively chosen the Republic fighter over the Lockheed fighter, they would have shorted themselves thousands of planes at a time they needed them the most.

Personal preference, the P-38.  Not only did one kill Admiral Yamamoto, they also work well opening cans.

[Hoodat]

Also had a fondness for the F-20 Tigershark.  Unfortunately, it was never as politically protected as the F-16.  General Dynamics managed to spread production of the F-16 over 37 states, so there was always a majority of US Senators willing to protect it from competition.

[Smokin Joe]

We can all argue that point.  Life is full of trade-offs, and that applies to military aircraft as well.  Each plane has its advantages and disadvantages.  And depending on each scenario, the preferable plane may not be the same each time.  Which is why I have a problem with the F-35.  There's a reason the Navy doesn't deploy F-16s on carriers, just as there is a reason the Air Force hates A-10s.

Back to WWII, the original P-51 was not a good plane.  Only after it was refitted with the RR Merlin did it achieve its status as a premier fighter.  Consider also that there were several competitors making their own planes.  If the military had exclusively chosen the Republic fighter over the Lockheed fighter, they would have shorted themselves thousands of planes at a time they needed them the most.

Personal preference, the P-38.  Not only did one kill Admiral Yamamoto, they also work well opening cans.

Like you said, trade offs are the order of the day with aircraft, and role is important. The p-47 worked from Bombing escort altitudes in Europe to the deck in CAS, but never was a carrier aircraft. (For that matter, neither were the P-51 or the P-38), but the B-25 oddly was...

Everyone's using pouches now, but I still carry one on my keychain...And, yes, even though I was never in the service, I have eaten c-rations and worse (and better) from cans opened with one.

Say what you will, but what really cost the Japanese that Admiral was the intel that put the planes there to intercept his flight.

[PeteS in CA]

Weeeelllll, B-25s flew off a carrier once, that I know of, and IIRC they had been stripped of defensive armament. Doolittle relied on surprise for defense, and the Hornet relied, during the run-in, on Enterprise for fighter defense.

Both intel and the P-38 were keys to taking out Yamamoto. The intel yielded his itinerary and schedule. The P-38 had the range, barely, to make the round trip, including staying clear of islands that might have Japanese spotters who could give warning and some time to engage the Bettys and Zero escort.

[Smokin Joe]

Weeeelllll, B-25s flew off a carrier once, that I know of, and IIRC they had been stripped of defensive armament. Doolittle relied on surprise for defense, and the Hornet relied, during the run-in, on Enterprise for fighter defense.

Both intel and the P-38 were keys to taking out Yamamoto. The intel yielded his itinerary and schedule. The P-38 had the range, barely, to make the round trip, including staying clear of islands that might have Japanese spotters who could give warning and some time to engage the Bettys and Zero escort.

The mission was a "Hail Mary" that paid off. No doubt about it. 'Time over target' was limited because of the extreme range, so the intel was vital to the success of the operation.