to settle a dispute

[Ecko]

I think maybe your friend means some sort of ground effect.... That when a plane somes in to land especially planes like the Vulcan hit the compressed air over the runway..

The russians tested that effect for use for a Troop carrier.. The Ekranoplane

See the below vid and show it to your friend to see if this is what he means..


VERY COOL CONTENTS!!!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q6HQSNERadQ

You can also just search youtube for ekranoplane

That thing is awesome!

[Woodlouse2002]

Please tell me what it cannot do, back yourself up if your going to say stuff like that, or don't say it at all.

Because, if your judging that the JSF is not in operational service, then specify that. Second, the JSF will be 100% "everything the Harrier can do it", plus with the addition of stealth.

My point was, as Charlie said the JSF cannot take off vertically carrying an opertional load and hence can't take off the British Carriers. It can't even use a ski jump like the Harrier did.

The JSF doesn't have stealth. It just has a slightly lower than normal radar reflection. The F22 doesn't have real stealth either.

The only thing that the JSF can do that the Harrier can't is go supersonic. But thats only because the Americans took the development of the Harrier away from the British and then stopped developing it completely. If the Harrier had stayed with Bae and if there was a call for it the Harrier would have been supersonic years ago. Whats more if it wasn't for the Sandys "White Paper" in the 60's the Harrier would have been supersonic from the very start.

[C]

The only thing that the JSF can do that the Harrier can't is go supersonic. But thats only because the Americans took the development of the Harrier away from the British and then stopped developing it completely. If the Harrier had stayed with Bae and if there was a call for it the Harrier would have been supersonic years ago. Whats more if it wasn't for the Sandys "White Paper" in the 60's the Harrier would have been supersonic from the very start.

The Harrier would not have needed to be supersonic as HS were building the P.1154, which was in an advanced stage of construction when the then (Labour unsurprisingly) government cancelled the project - and this was some 8 years post Sandys. The RAF decided to let this happen virtually unopposed, hoping that they could focus on the TSR2...

...a year later, the same government cancelled that too.

[Hagar]

The P.1154 story

[Woodlouse2002]

Interesting to note that the P.1154 was going to be called the Harrier while the aircraft that eventually got it's name was going to be called the Kestrel. The name was changed when the P.1154 was cancelled.

[RitterKreuz]

Given a stong enough head wind, it is possible to "hover" an aircraft of any size. It is even possible to takeoff and land vertically or cause the aircraft to move backwards. is this "hovering" in every practical sense of the word? Probably... then again probably not - that would depend on the argument presented. But possible? absolutely.

this is obviously not something an aircraft would intentionally do during every day normal operations except for mayby playing around - but certainly not something an aircraft would be seen doing in normal ops.

I have seen 747s coming out of Dallas - so big and so slow in the climb it almost looks as if they are not moving sometimes, now thats just an optical illusion.

[dcunning30]

I have seen 747s coming out of Dallas - so big and so slow in the climb it almost looks as if they are not moving sometimes, now thats just an optical illusion.

I think that speaks to the original subject matter more than anything the rest of us have said.

[Brett_Henderson]

I think maybe your friend means some sort of ground effect.... That when a plane somes in to land especially planes like the Vulcan hit the compressed air over the runway..

I'm late to the discussion (luckily), but that's something I want to correct.

Ground effect isn't a compressed air thing.. Or, as some call it, "a cushion of air".

When a wing gets near enough to the ground, the cycle of air flowing around and back toward the wing (kind of like wake turbulence) is disrupted (effected) by the ground. During ground effect, drag is lessened and lift is increased. Air is not compressed or ridden on top of  :P

[Souichiro]

Thanks!!

Sheesh I actually learned something from thi thread...


Please excuse me while I'll go and try to lose a bit of memory by smashing my head into a wall a few times

[SkyNoz]

My point was, as Charlie said the JSF cannot take off vertically carrying an opertional load and hence can't take off the British Carriers. It can't even use a ski jump like the Harrier did.

The JSF doesn't have stealth. It just has a slightly lower than normal radar reflection. The F22 doesn't have real stealth either.

The only thing that the JSF can do that the Harrier can't is go supersonic. But thats only because the Americans took the development of the Harrier away from the British and then stopped developing it completely. If the Harrier had stayed with Bae and if there was a call for it the Harrier would have been supersonic years ago. Whats more if it wasn't for the Sandys "White Paper" in the 60's the Harrier would have been supersonic from the very start.

Well, even though from everyone's opinions about the JSF being not capable as such as the Harrier, etheir way your goverment is goin to get

[Hagar]

Now I don't really see the point in mentioning flaws with this aircraft, there is really no point to.. Unless it's to insult American aeronuatical egineering or other perosonal thoughts. Or to debate that, the Americans egineered your replacement or whatever

Ah, now I see what all this is about. If you care to check your facts this is an international project.

The Lockheed Martin JSF team includes Northrop Grumman, BAE Systems, Pratt and Whitney and Rolls-Royce. Final assembly of the aircraft will take place at Lockheed Martin's Fort Worth plant in Texas.

Major subassemblies will be produced by Northrop Grumman Integrated Systems at El Segundo, California and BAE Systems at Samlesbury, Lancashire, England. BAE Systems is responsible for the design and integration of the aft fuselage, horizontal and vertical tails and the wing-fold mechanism for the CV variant, using experience from the Harrier STOVL programme.

As it's still under development there are bound to be flaws. We shall have to wait & see whether these will be overcome.

The F136 engine began ground testing in July 2004. Delivery of the first production engine is scheduled for 2011. Each engine will be fitted with two BAE Systems Full Authority Digital Electronic Control (FADEC) systems. Hamilton Sundstrand is providing the gearbox.

This all stems from my first reply that the Harrier is the only plane that can hover. My statement was correct & nothing was implied by it. I think that RitterKruez has come up with the most likely answer to the original question

[C]

Now I don't really see the point in mentioning flaws with this aircraft, there is really no point to.. Unless it's to insult American aeronuatical egineering or other perosonal thoughts. Or to debate that, the Americans egineered your replacement or whatever

Yes, as Doug says, you will find that JSF is a very international project, even if some (probably political) factions try and muscle out the foreign manufacturers (remember how amazingly the GE/Rolls Royce engine option - probably favourable to the British - was cancelled leaving P&W as the sole engine supplier... ).