Author Topic: F-35 versus Harrie  (Read 1934 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online PR19_Kit

  • Closeted Take That fan
  • What-IF SIG
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 27806
  • Whiffing since the 70s
Re: F-35 versus Harrie
« Reply #15 on: January 21, 2018, 08:42:06 am »
 

Having seen the B up close in STOL mode and on take off, I found it sounds much like a F/A-18 (decibel, and type of sound wise) on take off, and quieter than harrier on short landings. Would not call it horrific.  I have not seen it in true hover. 


Having watched (and heard...) the F-35B reproduce the 'Harrier Standard' hover, sideways flight and 'bow' at last year's RIAT I'd say it's a lot louder than a Harrier. It's also a higher frequency sound, presumably because of the re-heated main engine exhaust in the hover.

Um, it doesn't use the reheat in hover Kit


It's certainly loud enough for it though.

And why is everyone going about 'ground erosion' etc.

Any aircraft can be improved by fitting longer wings, and/or a longer fuselage

...and I'm not a closeted 'Take That' fan, I'm a REAL fan! :)

Regards
Kit

Offline kitnut617

  • That's got his tum rumbling already just by the sound of it.
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 10489
Re: F-35 versus Harrie
« Reply #16 on: January 21, 2018, 09:24:38 am »
 

Having seen the B up close in STOL mode and on take off, I found it sounds much like a F/A-18 (decibel, and type of sound wise) on take off, and quieter than harrier on short landings. Would not call it horrific.  I have not seen it in true hover. 


Having watched (and heard...) the F-35B reproduce the 'Harrier Standard' hover, sideways flight and 'bow' at last year's RIAT I'd say it's a lot louder than a Harrier. It's also a higher frequency sound, presumably because of the re-heated main engine exhaust in the hover.

Um, it doesn't use the reheat in hover Kit


It's certainly loud enough for it though.

And why is everyone going about 'ground erosion' etc.

Reading about the engine, the hot exhaust puts out about 28,000 lb of thrust dry, 43,000 lb with reheat. The fan when engaged puts out about 20,000 lb of thrust and the roll puffers put out another 3,800 lbs.  So you can see that the F-35 has almost twice the thrust in the hover as a Harrier. The F-35 is almost twice as big and heavy as a Harrier.
If I'm not building models, I'm out riding my dirtbike

Offline rickshaw

  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 9339
Re: F-35 versus Harrie
« Reply #17 on: January 21, 2018, 05:39:10 pm »
I am unsure why the deck problem is a problem, really.  All that is required is a slightly elevated deck with a grid as it's basis - the hot air "blows through" and out the sides.   I seem to remember the US Navy was thinking about doing that for one of their many iterations of the VSTOL aircraft they designed before the F-35...    :banghead:

That would make it difficult to walk on in stiletto heels...

 :o

"Any Seaman wearing Stilettos on the main deck is taking their own lives into their own hands!" - Captain to crew.     :banghead:
How to reduce carbon emissions - Tip #1 - Walk to the Bar for drinks.

Offline Old Wombat

  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 6122
  • Armour: The Gods of War love it!
Re: F-35 versus Harrie
« Reply #18 on: January 21, 2018, 06:31:34 pm »
The generic term is "sailor" when referring to all ranks, unless, of course, you're implying that NCO's & Officers are exempt? ;)
Has a life outside of What-If & wishes it would stop interfering!

"The purpose of all War is Peace" - St. Augustine

veritas ad mortus veritas est