Nice propaganda piece from whoever's trying to justify the horrible decision to put VTOL on the F-35.
Was it propaganda? I watched it with no sound, but I was thinking about Pierre Sprey's critiques the whole time. At least we have excellent pilots.
Pilot lands faulty fighter jet on a stool at sea [video]
21–30 of 35 posts
Re: Pilot lands faulty fighter jet on a stool at sea [video]
#22A purpose-built tool that LOOKS like a stool. Ie. the title is misleading.
I don't understand the distinction you are trying to make. Even if it's purpose built, it still fits the definition of a stool.
All the stools I've ever sat on would be about as tall as one of the wheels and would have been crushed to splinters...
Re: Pilot lands faulty fighter jet on a stool at sea [video]
#23A purpose-built tool that LOOKS like a stool. Ie. the title is misleading.
"Stool" is probably a more descriptive term than what it is really called, which is probably along the lines of "EMERGENCY LANDING GIRDLE, HARRIER, REINFORCED, MIL-STD 9503" and conveniently priced in the upper five figures.
If that were the case, it wouldn't be a stool, it would be an ELGHR. It looks pretty uncomfortable, too, especially for upwards of $10k.
Re: Pilot lands faulty fighter jet on a stool at sea [video]
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Stool" is probably a more descriptive term than what it is really called, which is probably along the lines of "EMERGENCY LANDING GIRDLE, HARRIER, REINFORCED, MIL-STD 9503" and conveniently priced in the upper five figures.
If that were the case, it wouldn't be a stool, it would be an ELGHR. It looks pretty uncomfortable, too, especially for upwards of $10k.
Clearly its a Support Tool On Oversized Legs :-)
Re: Pilot lands faulty fighter jet on a stool at sea [video]
#25Nice propaganda piece from whoever's trying to justify the horrible decision to put VTOL on the F-35.
Harrier is 45 years old. There is no need for propaganda, just a statistics form its use would do it. So there is definitely need for the new VTOL.
How this new VTOL was built is another question. F-35 VTOL seems to be an improvement over Harrier. Of course it is still to be seen in real life. What, because of VTOL req, F-35 isn't an improvement over is the F-15/18/22/etc...
Re: Pilot lands faulty fighter jet on a stool at sea [video]
#26Nice propaganda piece from whoever's trying to justify the horrible decision to put VTOL on the F-35.
The Harrier still is a pretty impressive fighter. The F-35 is, also, quite impressive, but not quite for the same reasons. Or the right ones, I should say.
Unfortunately, in this world that considers low observability so important, the Harrier is the opposite of stealth.
Re: Pilot lands faulty fighter jet on a stool at sea [video]
#27This is amazing, Harriers are notoriously hard to control in vertical ascent/descent.
I keep hearing managing the transition between normal flight and VTOL flight is the trickiest part, and that the VTOL mode is very automated, with reaction jets on the wings controlled with the stick the way you would expect them to be.
Re: Pilot lands faulty fighter jet on a stool at sea [video]
#28Re: Pilot lands faulty fighter jet on a stool at sea [video]
#29Nice propaganda piece from whoever's trying to justify the horrible decision to put VTOL on the F-35.
The Harrier still is a pretty impressive fighter. The F-35 is, also, quite impressive, but not quite for the same reasons. Or the right ones, I should say. Unfortunately, in this world that considers low observability so important, the Harrier is the opposite of stealth.
Low observability is crucial in a world where a $100,000 missile can bring down a $100,000,000 fighter.
Re: Pilot lands faulty fighter jet on a stool at sea [video]
#30What would've happened had the "stool" not been there? It seemed (though perhaps the footage was slowed) that the plane descended vertically pretty slowly, so it would've banged the nose on the carrier at touchdown, but would that have been severe?
It would certainly have grounded the aircraft until it could be inspected/repaired back on land and it would probably have destroyed the radar housed in the aircraft's nose.
You can see the airframe flex a bit as he hits the stool so you'd likely break the frame if it hit too hard.
The point where it's flexing is where the front gear would normally be.