the ski jump isn't perfect but it a a lot cheaper than a catapult and is better than nothing since a ski jump can allow aircraft to take off with a full load of fuel or a full load of weapons where as nothing like what the us marines have on the us navy LHD restrict aircraft to take off without a full load of fuel and weapons
Saab spent hundreds of millions developing the Gripen that can take off on short runways. Meanwhile, lockheed is like yo...we're gonna get 12 teenagers to build up a sick ramp and we're gonna ramp this multi-billion dollar jet into the air.
Why don't we use ski jumps for many land based air strips? By reducing required runway length for a given thrust and loaded weight you may be able to expand the number of runways available to those with long length requirements. It may also be be able to allow slightly reduced thrust for aircraft using their normal runway length with a ski jump. Slightly less thrust for takeoff means slightly more fuel for the flight.
You only need these if you don't build real Carriers. As they allow them to take off with full ordnance and fuel load. As they don't have inflight refueling Planes at Sea. Why when this Plane lands. If will have used up half it's fuel load..
Safety. On a normal runway you can take off whenever the craft is ready. When you hit that ramp you have to be ready to take off, no room for failures. It would greatly complicate rejected takeoff procedures and/or make some of them impossible. This risk is acceptable and necessary on an aircraft carrier, but would be totally unacceptable for most civilian flight.
@@WizzRacing They are retrofitting catapults now after all that. The two carriers the UK uses had space built in to them for the system if needed. Not sure why they didn't originally...as it must have been cheaper than using F35B's with reduced payload.
By the way US Army warrant officer pilots are also referred to as Mister. Once promoted to the Chief Warrant Officer ranks they are often referred to as Chief. In other countries they tend to use the full rank to address them instead of Chief or Mister.
They need to make sure it'll function with a full weapons load without the aerodynamics or the centre of gravity going squirrely. Could be a lot worse though, during the early test flights of the Blackburn Buccaneer the shiny new contour-following radar (codenamed Blue Parrot) was slow in completing development so the British substituted a lump of concrete of the same weight, which was referred to as component Blue Circle (after the Blue Circle Cement Company).
this video is proof that a carrier doesnt need to have catapults like the Americans, the reason why the Russian Su-33 cant carry more load is because its too big and heavy, I believe a navalized Mig-35 would do better than the Su-33.
Catapults are very maintenance intensive and costly . On US Carriers , they use 1 reactor just to power the steam catapults . But the jets can take off with a full load at speed using catapults .
The ramp does way with the need for a catapult which is a maintenance issue and takes up internal space. It was the solution for the Harrier jump jet to take off with a full combat load. Its pretty simple it converts the forward movement of the jet into a positive climb rate and allowing the plane to keep accelerating. Should the jet have an engine failure and fail to climb because of the trajectory puts the plane far away from the ship. Its a concept that works and most new carriers use it.
Everyone that's talking about how the ramp does away with the need for a catapult, you do realize that the F-35B isn't cat-compatible, nor trap-compatible. The ramp allows a larger payload to be launched with a STOVL aircraft.
Everything is trade off. Ramp= more fuel, more ordnance hanging. Ramp also= losing two or more spots on your amphib...means you can spot less helos or MV-22s. F-35B or any other aircraft is one part of a system of assets that will operate together. Launch an amphibious / expeditionary heliborne assault and you need to quickly spot max number of MV-22s, plus launch F-35B escorts if going long...possibly Vipers and Venoms if needed go cover initial "feet dry" transition or to remove threats close in or for deception, etc. You have one deck, usually, maybe a spot or two with other ships in group, and its a Rubic's Cube equation of how you will launch, put in starboard "D" for waiting, respot, load, launch, refuel waiting waves, muster, and push...wash, rinse, repeat. I'll personally take no ramp and more spot options / deck transition options.
I don't understand why the lift fan cover flips up like that causing massive drag. Why not two side hinged doors to limit the drag? Still a beautiful looking jet, but that lift fan door bugs me, like the Rafale's fixed refueling probe :)
Not fully ready. They have a somewhat limited but combat capable software package. The next software version is due in several months which should bring it to full capability.
Mr Clean Yes, operational means combat ready. The F-35B has been in active service in the USMC since July 2015 and the F-35A in the USAF since August 2016.
It's so sad that the F-35 is still only in the testing and evaluation phases after the beginning of the program as the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) in 1992. Yes, 1992 -- 25 years ago! The U.S. Navy hasn't even yet declared Initial Operational Capability (IOC) of the F-35C, and no service has declared Full Operational Capability (FOC), which may still take several years, if ever. And this is after well over 200 F-35s have been thus far produced. This means that all of the F-35s that have thus far been produced will need to extensive re-work, once, or "if" Lockheed Martin (LMT) even figures out how to fix all of the serious glitches plaguing the unfortunate and corrupt F-35 program. Thank goodness at least the Navy (the branch I retired from) has been smart enough not to purchase the F-35, except in very low and required numbers. What a HUGE waste of taxpayer dollars the F-35 has proven to be! Let's just hope it never has to engage in close quarters dogfighting with any of the myriad of more agile fourth, or even third generation fighters out there. The F-35 will no doubt be THE LAST TIME the DOD even thinks about producing a common airframe for all three flying branches of the military, and the F-35 will, no doubt, go down as one of the greatest failures in aviation history. What an albatross/white elephant the F-35 program truly is!!!
BC: Well, they are just following the schedule. The USN is supposed to declare IOC in 2018. Been that way for several years. What does it matter when the program began? Over 210 aircraft flying with 10 nations every day. Look at the latest vaunted Russian fighters most of them have been piddling in test and development for just a long and they have only a handful flying.
Except its not, that was an early misconception, the A-10 is staying in service until at least 2022. After it is removed from service its role will be filled by the OA-X
It's not required for the F-35B, but when doing a short take off from a carrier it gives a pretty decent boost to the amount of fuel and weapons it can carry, so may as well.
It greatly reduces required runway length for a given thrust and loaded weight. This means you can get closer to the maximum loaded weight of an aircraft without exceeding the length of runway available on a carrier without a catapult.
![How F-35 Works? | F-35 [B] VTOL Animation | Three Bearing Swivel Nozzle and Lift System Animation.](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/lOEuHAvedoY/mqdefault.jpg)
![How F-35 Works? | F-35 [B] VTOL Animation | Three Bearing Swivel Nozzle and Lift System Animation.](/img/tr.png)
these videos should be the standard for all plane videos. with no stupid background music covering the jet noise. awesome video. awesome jet.
The way it jumped made it looks like it's mocking the critics.
F35B is really a spectacular engineering miracle. Unbeatable. The state of the art.
So you really can jump a jet, super cool.
when you don't have a catapult I guess a ramp makes sense if the jet needs to carry a heavy payload.
the ski jump isn't perfect but it a a lot cheaper than a catapult and is better than nothing since a ski jump can allow aircraft to take off with a full load of fuel or a full load of weapons where as nothing like what the us marines have on the us navy LHD restrict aircraft to take off without a full load of fuel and weapons
This is for the B variant so it wouldn’t be able to use a catapult anyway…
That's how the Russians and Chinese do it, oh and Travis Pastrana! 😄
Saab spent hundreds of millions developing the Gripen that can take off on short runways. Meanwhile, lockheed is like yo...we're gonna get 12 teenagers to build up a sick ramp and we're gonna ramp this multi-billion dollar jet into the air.
Works good, perfect for the Brits aircraft carriers.
Why don't we use ski jumps for many land based air strips? By reducing required runway length for a given thrust and loaded weight you may be able to expand the number of runways available to those with long length requirements. It may also be be able to allow slightly reduced thrust for aircraft using their normal runway length with a ski jump. Slightly less thrust for takeoff means slightly more fuel for the flight.
Most planes would hit their tails on the end of the ramp and are not designed to be used in that way.
SB: Land is is cheap. We have no lack of airbase acreage or runways.
You only need these if you don't build real Carriers. As they allow them to take off with full ordnance and fuel load. As they don't have inflight refueling Planes at Sea. Why when this Plane lands. If will have used up half it's fuel load..
Safety. On a normal runway you can take off whenever the craft is ready. When you hit that ramp you have to be ready to take off, no room for failures. It would greatly complicate rejected takeoff procedures and/or make some of them impossible. This risk is acceptable and necessary on an aircraft carrier, but would be totally unacceptable for most civilian flight.
@@WizzRacing They are retrofitting catapults now after all that. The two carriers the UK uses had space built in to them for the system if needed. Not sure why they didn't originally...as it must have been cheaper than using F35B's with reduced payload.
Russian carrier Kuznetsov has also the ramp, but unfortunately Su-33 cannot takeoff with full ordnance (air to air and air to ground).
mig 29k is best for ski jump aircraft carrier
Why is the pilot called Mr, instead of being called Capt or Lt or whatever. Is this a civilian test pilot or something?
An employee of LM.
By the way US Army warrant officer pilots are also referred to as Mister. Once promoted to the Chief Warrant Officer ranks they are often referred to as Chief. In other countries they tend to use the full rank to address them instead of Chief or Mister.
In case of test flight of F-35A in Nagoya, Japan, an employee of LM is the test pilot of F-35A.
Yes
Thanks for all the replies ppl.👍
A FUCKING RAMP
Wouldn't it be cool to ramp off with a 360 vertical.
Ramp allows for a heavier payload.
And shorter strip
For the British variant on the HMS Queen Elizabeth
British ships don't have catapults. They rely on a ramp
Please add more videos of f22 coolest plane
I'm no expert on military technology, but why are there missiles under the wings for a test flight?
They need to make sure it'll function with a full weapons load without the aerodynamics or the centre of gravity going squirrely.
Could be a lot worse though, during the early test flights of the Blackburn Buccaneer the shiny new contour-following radar (codenamed Blue Parrot) was slow in completing development so the British substituted a lump of concrete of the same weight, which was referred to as component Blue Circle (after the Blue Circle Cement Company).
LM rocks!!
Go Martin !!
The f35b
I can't wait to see the harrier meet this thing
I expected it to jump LOL
this video is proof that a carrier doesnt need to have catapults like the Americans, the reason why the Russian Su-33 cant carry more load is because its too big and heavy, I believe a navalized Mig-35 would do better than the Su-33.
Yeah
Just make a aircraft that Can quickly take off
Why do the new UK carriers need the ramp? Btw, I actually thought skis for wheels.
Catapults are very maintenance intensive and costly . On US Carriers , they use 1 reactor just to power the steam catapults . But the jets can take off with a full load at speed using catapults .
It allow shorter take off distances.
The ramp does way with the need for a catapult which is a maintenance issue and takes up internal space. It was the solution for the Harrier jump jet to take off with a full combat load. Its pretty simple it converts the forward movement of the jet into a positive climb rate and allowing the plane to keep accelerating. Should the jet have an engine failure and fail to climb because of the trajectory puts the plane far away from the ship.
Its a concept that works and most new carriers use it.
Everyone that's talking about how the ramp does away with the need for a catapult, you do realize that the F-35B isn't cat-compatible, nor trap-compatible. The ramp allows a larger payload to be launched with a STOVL aircraft.
А зачем говорили что он невидимка если ракеты и бомбы на внешней подвеске ???
Скажи это израильским F-35, которых не увидели сирийские С-300
Алексей Григорьев suk
What was the airspeed as it left the end? I know about the down thrust present.
Awesome to see how they turned Nozzle down
Still i can't wait to see the harrier see this
@@seantaggart7382 Hahaha Harrier is the oldest leader in this
@@PiyushSingh-cq2xv Im just saying
Everything is trade off. Ramp= more fuel, more ordnance hanging. Ramp also= losing two or more spots on your amphib...means you can spot less helos or MV-22s. F-35B or any other aircraft is one part of a system of assets that will operate together. Launch an amphibious / expeditionary heliborne assault and you need to quickly spot max number of MV-22s, plus launch F-35B escorts if going long...possibly Vipers and Venoms if needed go cover initial "feet dry" transition or to remove threats close in or for deception, etc. You have one deck, usually, maybe a spot or two with other ships in group, and its a Rubic's Cube equation of how you will launch, put in starboard "D" for waiting, respot, load, launch, refuel waiting waves, muster, and push...wash, rinse, repeat. I'll personally take no ramp and more spot options / deck transition options.
Yeah With more aircraft you can strike harder
Remember the f35 Strikes and runs
So more aircraft means more damage
Catapult assisted takeoff is costly and if a country chooses not to invest a lot of money upfront they are left with ramp takeoff
I don't understand why the lift fan cover flips up like that causing massive drag. Why not two side hinged doors to limit the drag? Still a beautiful looking jet, but that lift fan door bugs me, like the Rafale's fixed refueling probe :)
Directs air downwards.
Bana: At low speed, i.e. takeoff/landing, the door is not draggy. Drag is directly related to speed.
Remember the air has to flow down to go up
You got at least 3 feet of air that time. Can I try?
I want it for for personal use
But why, if it can work as same as helicopter
E.T part two???
Hurry up and finish this plane . Our military needs it !!!!
Several of the F35 variants are and have been operational for some time.. Where have you been?
grabir01 I know they have been operational for some time , but are they combat ready ?
Not fully ready. They have a somewhat limited but combat capable software package. The next software version is due in several months which should bring it to full capability.
Mr Clean Yes, operational means combat ready. The F-35B has been in active service in the USMC since July 2015 and the F-35A in the USAF since August 2016.
@@grabir01 they are
But they are small in numbers
Although i am not for war
Im saying i wanna test this out of terrorists maybe watch them run
Does someone know the take off speed? Looks very slow.
What's up Russia?
Pylons, a ramp? WTF 😂😂😂
Yes perfect jump indian style so good but why not sell f35 fighter is india
Plz make me one space-ship i need to explore the Universe.
Bad ass !!
คือมันไปติดปัญหาตรงนี้แหละคือไปรับปากเขาไว้ว่าจะไม่ดำเนินการเรื่องนี้เป็นข้อแลกเปลี่ยนทีนี้งานมันไม่ให้เดินหน้าฉันก็อยากจะปล่อยเขาก็ไม่ยอม
It's so sad that the F-35 is still only in the testing and evaluation phases after the beginning of the program as the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) in 1992. Yes, 1992 -- 25 years ago! The U.S. Navy hasn't even yet declared Initial Operational Capability (IOC) of the F-35C, and no service has declared Full Operational Capability (FOC), which may still take several years, if ever. And this is after well over 200 F-35s have been thus far produced. This means that all of the F-35s that have thus far been produced will need to extensive re-work, once, or "if" Lockheed Martin (LMT) even figures out how to fix all of the serious glitches plaguing the unfortunate and corrupt F-35 program. Thank goodness at least the Navy (the branch I retired from) has been smart enough not to purchase the F-35, except in very low and required numbers. What a HUGE waste of taxpayer dollars the F-35 has proven to be! Let's just hope it never has to engage in close quarters dogfighting with any of the myriad of more agile fourth, or even third generation fighters out there. The F-35 will no doubt be THE LAST TIME the DOD even thinks about producing a common airframe for all three flying branches of the military, and the F-35 will, no doubt, go down as one of the greatest failures in aviation history. What an albatross/white elephant the F-35 program truly is!!!
BC: Well, they are just following the schedule. The USN is supposed to declare IOC in 2018. Been that way for several years. What does it matter when the program began? Over 210 aircraft flying with 10 nations every day. Look at the latest vaunted Russian fighters most of them have been piddling in test and development for just a long and they have only a handful flying.
Hey!
Wait a few years it's still in testing
I Think we all lost our minds in 2016
This comment aged like milk lol
This amazing aircraft is the finest human race top creation.
First. And also the coolest plane to date
C'mon there is plenty of cooler planes. For example a legend:F14
There is nothing simple about vertical takeoff and landing.
There is nothing on this aircraft that is 60's tech. 60's concept, but not tech.
@@NotKalashnikov Well hey Remember this is the future
the f35 is AMAZING
@@seantaggart7382 yah
SUPER
This was even cooler than I expected.
😍
Junk the f22 is were its at
Nice ... works"
british people
This will replace the A-10. I'm sad 😢
Xander01 Gamer ~ Truly the Warthog is one bad mo fo.
Sheree Sheree sure is a beauty
Except its not, that was an early misconception, the A-10 is staying in service until at least 2022. After it is removed from service its role will be filled by the OA-X
Crunchy Memes heh, didn't know that
@@reillybrangan2182 yeah The a10 is just extremely slow
But it won't ever be forgotten
skrt
Господи, что это за га..
Why would anyone have a ski ramp in the first place? No aircraft need a ski ramp to take off
It's not required for the F-35B, but when doing a short take off from a carrier it gives a pretty decent boost to the amount of fuel and weapons it can carry, so may as well.
It greatly reduces required runway length for a given thrust and loaded weight. This means you can get closer to the maximum loaded weight of an aircraft without exceeding the length of runway available on a carrier without a catapult.
Boeingemployee1989 British carriers use ski jump ramps.
It's actually highly effective and we might start doing it with the USMC.
ฉันปล่อยเธอไปนะเรื่องผู้หญิงนี่ไม่ยากเลยมันจะเป็นส่วนหนึ่งของงานฉันฉันจะเข้าถึงอุตสาหกรรมใต้สะดือคือคัดคนดีๆมาดำเนินงานมาอยู่กับฉันได้เลยอ่ะเขาว่าอย่างนั้น