Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Marine Corps F-35 goes supersonic
F-16.net ^ | 6/14/2010 | by John R. Kent

Posted on 06/19/2010 11:58:42 PM PDT by ErnstStavroBlofeld

F-35 Joint Strike Fighter short takeoff/vertical landing (STOVL) variant flew faster than the speed of sound for the first time June 10, achieving a significant milestone. The aircraft accelerated to Mach 1.07 (727 miles per hour) on the first in a long series of planned supersonic flights.

"For the first time in military aviation history, supersonic, radar-evading stealth comes with short takeoff/vertical landing capability," said Bob Price, Lockheed Martin's F-35 U.S. Marine Corps program manager. "The supersonic F-35B can deploy from small ships and austere bases near front-line combat zones, greatly enhancing combat air support with higher sortie-generation rates." The F-35B will enter service for the Marines, the United Kingdom's Royal Air Force and Royal Navy, and the Italian Air Force and Navy.

The supersonic milestone was achieved on the 30th flight of the F-35B known as BF-2. U.S. Marine Corps pilot Lt. Col. Matt Kelly climbed to 30,000 feet and accelerated to Mach 1.07 in the off-shore supersonic test track near Naval Air Station Patuxent River. Future testing will gradually expand the flight envelope out to the aircraft's top speed of Mach 1.6, which the F-35 is designed to achieve with a full internal weapons load of more than 3,000 pounds. All F-35s are designed to launch internal missiles at maximum supersonic speed, as well as launch internal guided bombs supersonically. During the flight, Kelly accomplished 21 unique test points, including several Integrated Test Blocks to validate roll, pitch, yaw and propulsion performance

(Excerpt) Read more at f-16.net ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: aerospace; dfense; f35; jointstrikefighter; jsf; naspatuxentriver; navair; stealth; supersonic; usmc

1 posted on 06/19/2010 11:58:42 PM PDT by ErnstStavroBlofeld
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: 1COUNTER-MORTER-68; Mr. Mojo; James C. Bennett; mowowie; Captain Beyond; USNBandit; Jet Jaguar; ...

Ping


2 posted on 06/20/2010 12:00:54 AM PDT by ErnstStavroBlofeld ( "Fortes fortuna adiuvat"-Fortune Favors the Strong)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pukin Dog

Ping for old time’s sake


3 posted on 06/20/2010 3:34:44 PM PDT by PAR35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Vroomfondel; SC Swamp Fox; Fred Hayek; NY Attitude; P3_Acoustic; Bean Counter; investigateworld; ...
SONOBUOY PING!

Click on pic for past Navair pings.

Post or FReepmail me if you wish to be enlisted in or discharged from the Navair Pinglist.
The only requirement for inclusion in the Navair Pinglist is an interest in Naval Aviation.
This is a medium to low volume pinglist.

4 posted on 06/20/2010 3:50:16 PM PDT by magslinger (If recycling makes cents as well as sense, I am all for it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sonofstrangelove
Future testing will gradually expand the flight envelope out to the aircraft's top speed of Mach 1.6, which the F-35 is designed to achieve with a full internal weapons load of more than 3,000 pounds.

Only 3,000 pounds!? WTF! That's like an expensive sniper rifle that fires spitballs. Too bad they can't perform aerial rearmament.

5 posted on 06/20/2010 4:58:58 PM PDT by 60Gunner (But there's this one particular harbor...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 60Gunner
Only 3,000 pounds!? WTF! That's like an expensive sniper rifle that fires spitballs. Too bad they can't perform aerial rearmament.

3000 lbs is the internal load (two 1000lb JDAMS plus two AIM-120s). The F-35 will also have six external wing stations, while the STOVL variant will have the ability to carry a 25mm gun pod on the centerline.
6 posted on 06/20/2010 5:18:36 PM PDT by tanknetter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: 60Gunner

With the Small Diameter Bomb and guidence they don’t need
the mammoth ord of the past.

Still hard to beat arclight though.


7 posted on 06/20/2010 5:25:07 PM PDT by tet68 ( " We would not die in that man's company, that fears his fellowship to die with us...." Henry V.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: magslinger

Add me to the pinglist...


8 posted on 06/20/2010 7:01:44 PM PDT by muffaletaman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: muffaletaman

Welcome aboard! You can check out past pings by doing a keyword search on ‘navair’ or clicking the pic on pings.


9 posted on 06/20/2010 8:36:09 PM PDT by magslinger (If recycling makes cents as well as sense, I am all for it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: sonofstrangelove

With that much engine in it I suspect the F-35 can do way more than mach 1.6 or whatever.


10 posted on 06/21/2010 12:49:07 PM PDT by valkyry1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: valkyry1
" With that much engine in it I suspect the F-35 can do way more than mach 1.6 or whatever. "

Nope. A combination of sheer weight from fuel load and the design of the 'stealthy' inlets give a maximum design mach limit of 1.8 with a light load. With a full internal ordinance load, the design tops out at 1.6, and some sources have been saying that even with the increased engine thrust, the design might not be able to break Mach 1.5; a bigger problem is the heat from the rear nozzle might damage current decks, and flight surgeons have expressed concern at the higher noise levels of the engine.
11 posted on 06/21/2010 5:45:05 PM PDT by DesScorp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: DesScorp

Well maybe I forgot to consider the inlets, but you look at the F-105 which had even higher wing loading and less thrust could do mach 2.1


12 posted on 06/21/2010 6:15:32 PM PDT by valkyry1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: sonofstrangelove

The Marine Corps get their own planes? Shouldn’t this be taken care of by the Navy?


13 posted on 06/24/2010 10:22:40 PM PDT by MinorityRepublican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson