F-35B STO Short Take Off & SkiJumponCVF Information pp172 30 Nov 2017 CVF: http://navy-matters.beedall.com/cvf1-02.htm Hull Dimensions (length x beam): STOVL CVF 284 metres (931 feet) length overall; 73 metres (239 feet) max width at flightdeck; Preparing for take-off: UK ramps 263.5 metres (865 feet) pp; up F-35 carrier integration effort 39 metres beam (water line) (128 feet) “...In the final analysis, the decision has been taken Draft: 11 metres (36 feet) JBD to delete the JBD from the STOVL CVF design. Cdr http://navy-matters.beedall. Scrubbed/ Lison explains: "We determined from the CFD mod- DELETED elling that the legacy JBD did not offer adequate com/cvf1-01.htm protection. Alternative designs were considered which offered some benefit, but two considerations persuaded us to delete the requirement. "First, the nozzle scheduling of the F-35B on take-off has yet to be fully established, and there was a risk that the jet blast would simply 'bounce' over the JBD. Second, the JBD was in a single fixed position on the flight deck, so there was no flexibil- ity with regard to the length of the take-off run."...” 11-Dec-2008 International Defence Review http://militarynuts.com/index.php?showtopic=1507&st=120 “...BF-1 accomplished the first F-35 five Creeping Vertical Landings (CVLs) on August 23....” F-35 Lightning II Program Status and Fast Facts September 5, 2012 http://f-35.ca/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/F-35-Fast-Facts-September-5-2012.pdf
http://navy-matters.beedall.com/cvfimages/cvf-model-oct04-1.jpg https://www.hpc.mil/images/hpcdocs/newsroom/ugc_2011_proceedings_small.pdf Declaring Blue Sky DWHVWFDUG Blue Sky OPS :KHQSUHSDULQJIRUDQ\WHVWVRUWLH *URXQGFUHZIROORZPDQGDWR U\SURFHGXUHVDQGHQJLQHHULQJVWHSV AIR International FRQVLGHUDWLRQPXVWEHJLYHQWRZKDW KDVEHHQDFKLHYHGDQGH[SHULHQFHG WRSUHSDUHWKHDLUFUDIWZKLFKW\SL F-35 Lightning II GXULQJSUHYLRXVÀLJKWVDQGZKDWWKH FDOO\WDNHVDFRXSOHRIKRXUVWRFRP 26 April 2012 QH[WVWHSVZLOOEH SOHWHEHIRUHWKH\UHIXHOWKHDLUFUDIWWR )ROORZLQJDVHULHVRIPHHWLQJVEH WKHGHVLUHGIXHOVWDWHDQGGHFODUHLWDV µEOXHVN\¶ Mark Ayton spoke with Peter WZHHQWKHSLORWHQJLQHHUVDQGVSH $WWKHVDPHWLPHW\SLFDOO\VWDUW Wilson, a former Royal Navy Sea FLDOLVWVWHVWSRLQWVIRUWKHQH[WVRUWLH DUHDJUHHGEDVHGXSRQWKHUHTXLUH LQJWKUHHKRXUVEHIRUHWDNHRϑWKH Harrier pilot and now STOVL lead ÀLJKWWHVWHQJLQHHUVDWOHDVWRQHUHS test pilot at NAS Patuxent River PHQWVRIWKHÀLJKWWHVWSURJUDPPH 7KHWHDPGHWHUPLQHVWKHFRPSOH[LW\ UHVHQWDWLYHIURPHDFKRIWKHHQJL )RUWKHSDVW¿YH\HDUVWHDPVRIÀLJKW RIHDFKWHVWSRLQWDQGZKDWUHKHDUVDOV QHHULQJGLVFLSOLQHVWKDWDUHLQWKHFRQ WHVWHQJLQHHUVDQGWHVWSLORWVKDYH DUHUHTXLUHGE\WKHSLORWLQWKHVLPXOD WUROURRPGXULQJWKHPLVVLRQDQGWKH FDUHIXOO\IROORZHGZHOOHVWDEOLVKHG WRU7KLVLVXVXDOO\GHFLGHGXSRQXSWR SLORWV )DQGFKDVHSODQHV JDWK SURFHGXUHVWRSUHSDUHDQGODXQFK RQHZHHNEHIRUHWKHÀLJKW7HVWSRLQWV HUIRUWKHSUHÀLJKWEULH¿QJ/DVW )/LJKWQLQJ,,VWULNH¿JKWHUVRQ WKDWDUHSUHGLFWHGWREHGLϒFXOWDUH LQJXSZDUGVRIRQHKRXUGLVFXVVLRQV ÀLJKWWHVWPLVVLRQV)ÀLJKWWHVW WKHQÀRZQLQWKHVLPXODWRUVRPHWLPHV WDNHSODFHEHWZHHQWKHSLORWWKHWHVW LQJFRQWLQXHVDWWKUHHVLWHV±(GZDUGV UHSHDWHGO\DOORZLQJWKHWHVWSLORWWR FRQGXFWRU RQHRIWKHÀLJKWWHVWHQJL $)%&DOLIRUQLD1$63DWX[HQW5LYHU UH¿QHKLVWHFKQLTXHDQGJLYHWKHWHDP QHHUV WKHWHVWGLUHFWRU ZLWKRYHUDOO LQ0DU\ODQGDQGIURP/RFNKHHG0DU WKHRSSRUWXQLW\WRGHWHUPLQHZKHWK UHVSRQVLELOLW\IRUWKHVRUWLH DQGWKH WLQ¶VPDVVLYHSURGXFWLRQDQGWHVWIDFLO HUWKHUHVXOWVJDLQHGIURPWKHVLPXOD GLVFLSOLQHHQJLQHHUVDERXWSUHGLFWLRQV LW\DW)RUW:RUWKLQ7H[DVELUWKSODFH WRUPHHWWKHUHTXLUHPHQWVIRUÀLJKW,W DQGH[SHFWDWLRQVRIWKHÀLJKWUHLWHUDW RIWKH-RLQW6WULNH)LJKWHU3URFHGXUHV LVYHU\FRPPRQIRUDWHVWSLORWWRÀ\ LQJWRWKHSLORWWKHSRLQWVREVHUYHGLQ LQYROYHGZLWKWKH)DUHXQLTXHWR SDUWVRIDWHVWPLVVLRQLQWKHVLPXOD WKHVLPXODWRU WKHDLUFUDIWEXWKDYHWKHVDPHREMHF WRUGXULQJWKHZHHNOHDGLQJXSWRWKH 7KHDVVHPEOHGWHDPDOVRUXQV WLYHDVDQ\RWKHUDLUFUDIWDQGWKDWLVWR ÀLJKW7KHKLJK¿GHOLW\RIWKHVLPXODWRU WKURXJKDQHQWLUHGULOOWRGLVFXVVKRZ SUHSDUHIRUHDFKWHVWÀLJKW7KHWHVW DGGVJUHDWYDOXHWRWKHZKROHSURFHVV WRGHDOZLWKWKHµHPHUJHQF\RIWKH WHDPEDVHGDW1$63DWX[HQW5LYHU ,QFRPPRQZLWKRWKHUÀLJKWWHVW GD\¶7KLVLQYROYHVDV\VWHPIDLOXUH XVHVWKHWHUPµEOXHVN\¶WRLQGLFDWH RSHUDWLRQVDOORIWKHWHVWVSRLQWVUH ZKLFKRFFXUVGXULQJÀLJKWDVVHOHFW WKDWWKHDLUFUDIWLVUHDG\WRJRÀ\LQJ TXLUHGIRUDQ)VRUWLHDUHOLVWHGRQ HGE\WKHSLORW,WLVDQRWLRQDOH[HU FLVHVWDJHGWRHQVXUHHYHU\RQHLVZHOO1 SUDFWLVHGDWWKHUHTXLUHGSURFHGXUHV FRPSOHWHEHIRUHKHOSLQJWKHJURXQG ZHUHIDLUO\FRPPRQLQWKHHDUO\GD\V WRJHWWKHDLUFUDIWEDFNVDIHO\LQRQH FUHZWRSRZHUGRZQWKHDLUFUDIW RIÀLJKWWHVWLQJEXWEHFDXVHRIVRIW SLHFH (QJLQHVWDUWXSLVKLJKO\DXWR ZDUHDQGKDUGZDUHXSJUDGHVLQWHJUDW 7HVWSLORWVDVVLJQHGWRWKH) PDWHGUHTXLULQJMXVWWKUHHVZLWFKVH HGRQWKHMHWDQGPDWXULW\LQWKHV\V WHVWIRUFHDW3DWX[HQW5LYHUDUHTXDO OHFWLRQVRQHHDFKIRUWKHEDWWHU\LQ WHPVFROGLURQF\FOHVDUHQRZDUDUH L¿HGWRÀ\ERWKWKH6729/DQG&9 WHJUDWHGSRZHUSDFNDQGWKHHQJLQH HYHQWDFFRUGLQJWRWKRVH)WHVWSL YDULDQWVDQGDUHXVXDOO\DOORFDWHGWR 2QO\WZRVHOHFWLRQVDUHUHTXLUHGIRUD ORWVLQWHUYLHZHGE\$,5,QWHUQDWLRQDO WKHÀLJKWVFKHGXOHKRXUVLQDG KRWVWDUW DW1$63DWX[HQW5LYHU YDQFHRIDVRUWLH :KHQWKHHQJLQHKDVVWDUWHGDQG 2QWKHÀLJKWOLQHWKHSUHÀLJKW LVIXOO\VSRROHGXSWKHSLORWPXVWUXQ Pilot’s View SURFHGXUHVUHTXLUHGDUHVRPHZKDW DIHZEULHIFKHFNVVSHFL¿FWRÀLJKW 7KHDXWKRUZDVNHHQWRKHDUZKDWWKH GLϑHUHQWWRWKRVHWKDWZLOOEHLQYROYHG WHVWSURFHGXUHVZKLFKDUHXQGHUWDN )LVOLNHWRÀ\SDUWLFXODUO\DWWDNH IRUIXWXUHRSHUDWLRQVDQGUHTXLUHDORW HQEHIRUHUXQQLQJWKHYHKLFOHV\V RϑZKLFKDOZD\VVKRZVGUDPDWLFDF RISHRSOHWRVXSSRUWYDULRXVV\VWHPV WHPVEXLOWLQWHVW 96%,7 ,QLWLDWHG FHOHUDWLRQ3HWHU:LOVRQH[SODLQHG GXULQJWKHVWDUWXSSURFHVV7KHVHLQ E\DEXWWRQLQWKHFRFNSLWWKHV\VWHP ³7KHWDNHRϑLWVHOILVXQUHPDUNDEOH FOXGHDWHDPRIIRXUWRPDQDJHWKH VHOIWHVWVDOPRVWHYHU\IXQFWLRQLPDJ LQDIWHUEXUQHUWKHDHURSODQHDFFHOHU LQVWUXPHQWDWLRQV\VWHP WKHRUDQJH LQDEOHRQWKHDLUFUDIWLQFOXGLQJWKH DWHVGUDPDWLFDOO\EXWLW¶VFRPSDUDEOH ZLUHDQGVHQVRUVXVHGWRPRQLWRUEH 6729/GRRUVLQWKHFDVHRIDQ)% ZLWKOHJDF\¿JKWHUVDQGYHU\ZHLJKW KDYLRXUDQGSHUIRUPDQFHRIWKHDLU $IWHU VHFRQGVLIWKHUHDUHQRSURE GHSHQGHQW´ FUDIWLQÀLJKWWHVW FRPPRQWRDOO) OHPVWKHDLUFUDIWGHFODUHVLWVHOIUHDG\ %RWKWKH)$DQGWKH)&FDQ 6''DLUFUDIWDQGDFRQWUROHQJLQHHU IRUÀLJKW FDUU\PRUHWKDQRIWKHLUHPSW\ PDLQWDLQLQJFRPPXQLFDWLRQEHWZHHQ 7KHSLORWWKHQVHWVMRNHU UHWXUQWR ZHLJKWLQIXHOLQWHUQDOO\ZKLFKJLYHVDQ WKHFRQWUROURRPDQGJURXQGWHDP EDVH DQGELQJR PLQLPXP IXHOVWDWHV HQRUPRXVYDULDWLRQRIDFFHOHUDWLRQ :KHQWKHSLORWDUULYHVDWWKH WXUQVRQWKHKHOPHWPRXQWHGGLVSOD\ 2QHYHU\QRWDEOHV\VWHPRQWKH ÀLJKWOLQHWKHDLUFUDIWLVLQPDLQWH VHWVWKHEULJKWQHVVRIWKHGLVSOD\VDQG )LVWKHVLGHVWLFNORFDWHGRQWKH QDQFHPRGHDQGLWVHOHFWULFDOV\VWHPV LVUHDG\WRWD[L ULJKWVLGHRIWKHFRFNSLW7KHPHFKDQ DUHDOUHDG\SRZHUHGXSWRSURYLGHLQ 2QHWKLQJWKDWWKHSLORWDQGWHVW LFVRIWKHVLGHVWLFNDUHZHOOEDODQFHG VWUXPHQWDWLRQLQIRUPDWLRQWRWKHFRQ WHDPDOZD\VZDQWWRDYRLGLVPDNLQJ ZLWKMXVWWKHULJKWDPRXQWRIPRYH WUROURRP7KLVHQDEOHVGLVSOD\VDQG DµFROGLURQ¶FDOOZKLFKRFFXUVZKHQDQ PHQW DERXWòLQFKHVRUPP DF IXQFWLRQVWREHFKHFNHG±WKHSLORW RQERDUGV\VWHPLQGLFDWHVDSUREOHP FRUGLQJWR3HWHU:LOVRQZKRVDLG ³ XQGHUZD\EXWPXVWZDLWXQWLOWKH\DUH SHDWHGZLWKDQHQJLQHUHVWDUW7KHVH 2 WRURWDWHDQGEULQJWKHQRVHXSWRHV 6\PERORJ\LQWKHKHOPHWPRXQWHG DLUFUDIWDQGH[LWVWKHUXQZD\³2QFH WDEOLVKDQDWWLWXGHDWZKLFKWKHDHUR GLVSOD\DOORZVWKHSLORWWRVHHWKHDLU RQWKHJURXQG,GRQRWKDYHDQ\ÀDS SODQH¶VJRLQJWRFOLPEDZD\7KHDHUR FUDIWWUDFNFRQ¿UPLQJWKDWKHRUVKH OHYHUVWRPRYHRUDQ\ÀLJKWFRQWUROV SODQHIHHOVDEVROXWHO\URFNVROLGWKH LVDOLJQHGZLWKWKHUXQZD\HYHQLIWKH WRUHSRVLWLRQDQGLI,ZDQWWRJHWDLU KDQGOLQJIHHOVSUHFLVH´ QRVHLVQRWEHFDXVHRIFURVVZLQG7KH ERUQHDJDLQDOO,KDYHWRGRLVSXWWKH $YHU\GLVWLQFWIHDWXUHRIWKH) VLGHVWLFNLVH[WUHPHO\SUHFLVHIRUERWK SRZHUXSDQGLQLWLDWHWKHURWDWLRQ´ LVQRLVHERWKLQVLGHWKHFRFNSLWDQG ÀDULQJ WKHWHFKQLTXHXVHGWRJUDGX VDLG3HWHU:LOVRQ RXW³)URPWKHFRFNSLWLW¶VQRWHVSH DOO\UHGXFHWKHGHVFHQWUDWH WKHDLU 7KHWKURWWOHFRPPDQGVWKUXVWDQG FLDOO\ORXGEXWLWGRHVQ¶WVRXQGOLNHDQ\ FUDIWDQGDGMXVWLQJDQ\GULIWEXWHYHQ QRWWKHUSPRIWKHHQJLQHVRDWLGOH RWKHUDHURSODQHWKDW,¶YHÀRZQ´VDLG LIKHRUVKHGRHVQRWPDNHDQ\FRUUHF WKHHQJLQHLVSURYLGLQJRIWKH WKHOHDG6729/SLORW WLRQWKHDLUFUDIWZLOOODQGDQGVWUDLJKW WKUXVWDYDLODEOHDQGZKHQSXVKHGIRU 7KHULGHTXDOLW\RIWKH)LVDOVR HQLWVHOIXS³EHDXWLIXOO\´DFFRUGLQJWR ZDUGWRWKHPLOVWRSLWSURYLGHV GLϑHUHQWHVSHFLDOO\WKHSUHFLVLRQZLWK 3HWHU:LOVRQ³,W¶VWKHHDVLHVWDHUR RIWKHDYDLODEOHWKUXVWRUIXOOPLOSRZHU ZKLFKWKHSLORWFDQPDQRHXYUHWKHDLU SODQH,¶YHHYHUODQGHGDQGUHDOO\GRHV 7KHWKURWWOHJLYHVDOLQHDUYDULDWLRQRI FUDIWXVLQJWKHVLGHVWLFNWRSXWLWH[ ORRNDIWHU\RX:KHQ,WHOO\RXKRZ WKHSHUFHQWDJHRIWKUXVWDYDLODEOHZLWK DFWO\ZKHUHKHRUVKHZDQWV³,W¶V HDV\LWLVWRODQGLQWKHEDFNRIP\ LWVSRVLWLRQZKLFKPDNHVLWVXEWO\GLI PRVWQRWLFHDEOHZKHQ\RX¶UHWU\LQJWR PLQG,DPWKLQNLQJµLVQ¶WWKDWJRLQJ IHUHQWWRXVH2QHKXQGUHGSHUFHQW GRDWLJKWO\FRQWUROOHGIRUPDWLRQWDVN WREHJUHDWIRUWKH\RXQJSLORWZKR WKUXVWPHDQVMXVWWKDWZLWKQRYDULD OLNHDLUUHIXHOOLQJ,¶YHSOXJJHGLQWRD KDVZRUNHGKDUGWKURXJKRXWWKHPLV WLRQ ZKLFKFDQEHWKHFDVHZLWKDOHJ WDQNHUPDQ\WLPHVZLWKDUHPDUNDEO\ VLRQDQGQHHGVWRJHWKRPHZKHQKH DF\DLUFUDIW VRWKHSLORWNQRZVZKHQ KLJKVXFFHVVUDWHKLJKHUWKDQ,ZRXOG LVWLUHG¶´KHDGGHG WKHHQJLQHLVSURYLGLQJDOORIWKHSRZHU KDYHKDGRQWKH+DUULHUDQGZLWKD 7RGDWHDOOFRQYHQWLRQDOODQG WKDWLWFDQ GLϑHUHQWWHFKQLTXH7KHSLORWIRUPDWHV LQJVKDYHEHHQFDUULHGRXWPDQXDO WKHDLUUHIXHOOLQJSUREHGLUHFWO\RQWR O\ZLWKWKHVWLFN$QDXWRPDWLFV\VWHP Landing Vertically WKHEDVNHWRIWKHWDQNHUVLWVEHKLQGLW RQWKHWKURWWOHDOORZVWKHSLORWWRVH 2QHRIWKHPRVWIDVFLQDWLQJDVSHFWV DQGMXVWSOXJVLWZKHQLW¶VVWHDG\DQG OHFWWKH$3& DXWRPDWLFSRZHUFRQWURO RIWKHZKROHSURJUDPPHLVWKHZD\ OHYHO PRGHWKDWFRQWUROVWKHDQJOHRIDWWDFN LQZKLFKWKH)%DFKLHYHVDYHUWL &RPLQJLQWRODQGLVDOVRSUH ÀRZQRQ¿QDODSSURDFKGXULQJZKLFK FDOODQGLQJ:KHQSUHSDULQJWRWUDQVL FLVH³(YHQLQDFURVVZLQGLW¶VHDV\ WKHWKURWWOHPRYHVXSDQGGRZQLQUH WLRQIURPFRQYHQWLRQDOWR6729/PRGH WKHDHURSODQHSRLQWVLWVQRVHLQWRZLQG VSRQVHWRWKHFKDQJHV$WWRXFKGRZQ WKH¿UVWWKLQJWKHSLORWPXVWGRLVFRQ YHU\QLFHO\DQGUHGXFHVVLGHVOLS´VDLG WKHWKURWWOHDXWRPDWLFDOO\JRHVWRLGOH ¿JXUHWKHDLUFUDIWWREHDEOHWRÀ\DW 3HWHU:LOVRQ WKHSLORWDSSOLHVWKHEUDNHVWRVWRSWKH 3 VORZVSHHG7KLVSURFHVVLVFDOOHGFRQ WKHHQJLQHFDQEHFOHDUO\KHDUGIURP ODQGWKHSLORWKDVWRSXVKRQWKHVLGH YHUVLRQDQGIURPWKHSLORW¶VSHUVSHF WKHFRFNSLWDVWKHWKUXVWFKDQJHVGXU VWLFNXQWLOKHRUVKHIHHOVDVWRSDQG WLYHLWVWDUWVZKHQWKHDLUFUDIWLVPRY LQJORZVSHHGPDQRHXYULQJ KROGLWWKHUHXQWLOWKHDLUFUDIWGHWHFWV LQJDWNWV NPK RUOHVVDW &RPPHQWLQJRQWKHKRYHU3HWHU WKHODQGLQJDWZKLFKSRLQWLWUHWXUQV ZKLFKSRLQWKHRUVKHVLPSO\SUHVVHVD :LOVRQWROG$,5,QWHUQDWLRQDO ³,WLVDE WKHSURSXOVLRQV\VWHPEDFNWRLGOHDQG EXWWRQ VROXWHO\DVWRQLVKLQJWKHDHURSODQHLV PRYHVWKHQR]]OHWRWKHFRUUHFWSRVL ³6HFRQGVODWHUDVVXPLQJDOOKDV URFNVROLGLQWKHKRYHUDQGKROGVLWV WLRQDOORZLQJWKHSLORWWRWD[LIRUZDUG JRQHZHOO\RXDUHLQWKHPRGHWKDW SRVLWLRQH[WUHPHO\DFFXUDWHO\ZLWKRXW ZLWKQRWKLQJHOVHWRGR³7KHSUHFLVLRQ DOORZVWKHDLUFUDIWWRJRWRWKHKRYHU´ SLORWLQSXW´ ZLWKZKLFK\RXFDQODQGLVDPD]LQJ± VDLG3HWHU:LOVRQ 7KHDLUFUDIWFDQEHDFFXUDWHO\ RQWKHVSRWSOXVRUPLQXVLQFKHV 1LQHH[WHUQDOGRRUVRSHQLQVH PRYHGOHIWWRULJKWIRUHDQGDIWDQG HYHU\WLPHFRQVLVWHQWO\´VDLG:LOVRQ TXHQFHWDNLQJDERXWVHFRQGVDIWHU XSDQGGRZQE\IW P DWWKHSUH ZKLFKWKHSURSXOVLRQV\VWHP QRWWR IHUUHGSRVLWLRQRIIW P DERYH Nine Hops EHFRQIXVHGZLWKWKHHQJLQH VWDUWVWR WKHJURXQGEHIRUHGHVFHQW&RQWURO 'XULQJ6729/WHVWLQJLQ)HEUXDU\ VSRROXS7KHFOXWFKHQJDJHVWRVSRRO RIWKH)%LVJRYHUQHGE\VRPH 3HWHU:LOVRQÀHZQLQHVRUWLHV XSWKHOLIWIDQORFDWHGEHKLQGWKHFRFN WKLQJFDOOHGWKHXQL¿HGFRQWUROODZ IURP1$63DWX[HQW5LYHULQDERXWIRXU SLW ZKLFKWDNHVDERXWVHFRQGV ZKLFKZDVGHYHORSHGGXULQJUH KRXUVDOORIZKLFKZHUHOHVVWKDQ DQGWKHFRQWUROODZVFKDQJHWRPDNH VHDUFKDW%RVFRPEH'RZQLQWKH8. PLQXWHVLQGXUDWLRQ(DFKVRUWLHFDU XVHRIWKHSURSXOVLYHHϑHFWRUVWKDW ZLWKWKH9HFWRUHGWKUXVW$LUFUDIW$G ULHGDUHODWLYHO\ORZIXHOORDGDOORZ KDYHMXVWEHHQEURXJKWWROLIH7KHDLU YDQFHG&RQWURO 9$$& +DUULHULQD LQJ3HWHUWRWDNHRϑDQGÀ\DURXQG FUDIWLVQRZLQ6729/PRGHDQGUHDG\ SURMHFWIXQGHGMRLQWO\E\WKH8.DQG IRUDEULHISHULRGWRHQVXUHWKHIXHO IRUDYHUWLFDOODQGLQJ³ 3HWHU:LOVRQVD\VWKHYDU\LQJSLWFKRI 7RGHVFHQGIURPWKHKRYHUDQG 4 UHTXLUHGH[WUHPHQRVHGRZQDWWLWXGHV 7DNHRϑDWVSHHGVDVORZDV %)±EDVHGWKHUHWKHILIWKDLUFUDIW RQWKHDLUFUDIWDWYDULRXVZHLJKWVDQG NWV DQGNPK DUH %)ZDVGXHWREHGHOLYHUHGGXULQJ SKHQRPHQDOGHVFHQWUDWHV5HFRXQW DOVRSRVVLEOHHDFKRIZKLFKLVHϑHF WKHVSULQJRI%)%)DQG LQJWKHODQGLQJV3HWHU:LOVRQWROG WLYHO\DYHUWLFDOWDNHRϑZKLOHPRY %)DUHÀLJKWVFLHQFHVDLUFUDIWDQG $,5,QWHUQDWLRQDO ³,ZDVWULPPLQJ LQJIRUZDUG7KHUHDUHGLϑHUHQWZD\V DUHFXUUHQWO\LQYROYHGLQÀ\LQJTXDOL QRVHGRZQWRPDNHWKHQRVHJHDUKLW RIURWDWLQJWKHDLUFUDIWLQ6729/PRGH WLHVORDGVDQGIOXWWHUWHVWLQJ%) ¿UVWUDWKHUWKDQWKHPDLQJHDUFRP LQFOXGLQJWKHXVXDOµSXOORQWKHVWLFN¶ DQG%)DUHPLVVLRQV\VWHPVDLU LQJGRZQDVIDVWDV,FRXOGJLYHQWKH 2WKHUZD\VDUHE\SUHVVLQJDEXWWRQ FUDIWDQGDUHWHVWLQJDOORIWKHVHQVRUV FRQWUROODZRIWKHDHURSODQH:KHQ RUSURJUDPPLQJDJURXQGGLVWDQFHUH LQWHJUDWHGRQWKH) WKHQRVHJHDU XQGHUQHDWKWKHSLORW¶V TXLUHGDIWHUZKLFKWKHDLUFUDIWFRQWURO 3HUKDSVWKHODUJHVWWHVWHYHQW VHDW KLWV¿UVWDWWKDWVRUWRIGHVFHQW ODZLQLWLDWHVWKHURWDWLRQDQGVHOHFWV FRPLQJXSLQWKH¿QDOTXDUWHURI UDWHLWJHWV\RXUDWWHQWLRQEHFDXVHLW¶V WKHLGHDODQJOHIRUFOLPERXW LVWKH¿UVWVHDWULDOWREHXQGHUWDN DSUHWW\KHDY\ODQGLQJDQGDUHPDUN )%V%)DQG%)DUHWKH HQRQERDUGD:DVSFODVVDPSKLELRXV DEOHH[SHULHQFHLQWKHFRFNSLW´ RQO\%PRGHOVFXUUHQWO\XQGHUWDNLQJ DVVDXOWVKLS6XPPLQJXS3HWHU:LO 6729/WHVWLQJDQGWKHUHIRUHSHUIRUP VRQVDLG ³7KHWHVWSRLQWVUHTXLUHGWR )%7DNHRϑ2SWLRQV LQJWDNHRϑVLQ6729/PRGH3HWHU JRWRWKHVKLSDUHFOHDUO\LGHQWL¿HG 7KH)%6729/YDULDQWKDVDUDQJH :LOVRQFRPPHQWHG ³:HKDYHIRXQGD PRVWRIWKHPDUHFRPSOHWHZLWKDIHZ RIWDNHRϑRSWLRQVXVLQJGLϑHUHQW UHPDUNDEOHVLPLODULW\EHWZHHQ%) PRUHWRFRPSOHWHYHU\VRRQZKLFK PRGHVWRVXLWWKHEDVLQJ7DNHRϑV DQG%)ZKLFKJLYHVXVWKHFRQ¿ ZLOOEHWKH¿QDOWLFNLQWKHER[WRJRWR IURPDVKLSZLWKHLWKHUDÀDWGHFNRU GHQFHWRPRYHRQDQGJHWPRUHDHUR WKHVKLS RQHZLWKDVNLMXPSDUHDOVRSRVVLEOH SODQHV>%)IROORZHGE\%)@LQWR ³,WLVLPSRUWDQWIRUSHRSOHWRXQ ZLWKDPRGHIRUHDFKVFHQDULR7KHVH 6729/PRGHYHU\VRRQ´$WWKHWLPH GHUVWDQGWKHUHDVRQWKDWWKLVDLUFUDIW DUHVKRUWWDNHRϑVFHQDULRVWKDWFDQ RIFORVLQJIRUSUHVVLQPLG$SULOWKH H[LVWVLVQRWDVDVFLHQFHSURMHFWVHW EHDFKLHYHGDWVSHHGVDVORZDVNWV ¿UVWYHUWLFDOWDNHRϑKDGQRWWDNHQ DURXQGWDNHRϑDQGODQGLQJLWH[ ZLWKDGHFNRUJURXQGUXQRIQRPRUH SODFH LVWVWREULQJWKHPRVWDPD]LQJUDQJH WKDQDIW P ,QWKHVDPHPRGH RIVHQVRUVWKDWKDYHHYHUEHHQSXWWR DWDNHRϑDVIDVWDVNQRWVLVSRV STOVL Road Map JHWKHURQDVLQJOHDHURSODQHDQGGH VLEOHLIWKHZHLJKWRIWKHDLUFUDIWUH 0RVWRIWKH6729/ÀLJKWWHVWDFWLYL SOR\LWWRWKHEDWWOH¿HOGUHOLDEO\DQG TXLUHVWKDWVSHHG,IWKHDLUFUDIWLV W\LVQRZFRQFHQWUDWHGDW1$63DWX[ UHSHDWHGO\´ OLJKWLWFDQWDNHRϑDWDVORZVSHHG HQW5LYHUZLWKWKH¿UVWIRXU6'') KWWS militaryrussia.ru/forum/ DQGIDVWHUZKHQKHDY\ %V±%)%)%)DQG GRZQORDG¿OHSKS"LG " 5 THE JSF STOVL PERFORMANCE PROCESS FROM SMALL- SCALE DATABASE TO FLIGHT TEST DEMONSTRATION Kevin M. McCarthy, JSF Program Office/Naval Air Systems Command Nov 2002 http://pdf.aiaa.org/downloads/2002/CDReadyMBIPL02_686/2002_6002.pdf?CFID=3062772&CFTOKEN=60190979&jsessionid=8c3081cc2ed2274d1857TR - “...Fixing any two of: a) takeoff gross weight, b) deck run or c) wind over deck, STOPC can optimize for the 3rd parameter. The STO deck run starts at brake release, which typically occurs at the maximum thrust that the brakes can hold. This is an input. The engine spool-up characteristics from this throttle setting to maximum power are considered during the acceleration portion of the deck run. Weight on main and nose gear is calculated, and must be monitored to maintain adequate deck handling characteristics. The code can represent both flat deck, typical of current gener- ation US Navy ships, as well as any geometry of ski jump. Ski jumps are currently used by the navies of two of the JSF international participants, the UK and Italy. The code can be run with hard gear or with a gear dynamic model. The output is both tabular and graphical time history type values for all parameters. A typical product of STO anal- ysis is the gross weight verses deck run chart, represented by the cartoon on the right side of Figure 2...... STO demonstrations were a critical aspect of the flight test program as well. The X-35B performed two different technique STOs; 1) fixed nozzle and 2) auto-STOs. The fixed nozzle STOs are self-explanatory, and were used for the initial flight test STO maneuvers. For these maneuvers, the demonstrated performance was very consistent with pre- dicted levels. The flight test auto-STOs featured a deck run nozzle angle (34/28 fan/main) and flyaway nozzle angle between 40/40 and 60/60, depending on aircraft weight. The auto-rotation was pilot actuated at the desired rotation speed. Figure 43 illustrates the correlation between the demonstrated STO deck run performance and the predicted levels for the up-wind auto-STOs. STOs are transient maneuvers, and highly technique driven, even for the auto-STOs. The “blind” pre-flight pre- dicted performance estimates differed from the flight test maneuvers. Figure 47 reflects post-test adjustment of the model to reflect the maneuvers “as flown”. With this adjustment, the demonstrated performance was typically within 5% of prediction, but in all cases, the demonstrated deck runs were longer than predicted. The worst STO observed was 10% longer. Analyses to understand the reasons for this discrepancy are on going....” Abstract This paper discusses the STOVL performance calculation process that was executed during the Joint Strike Fighter Concept Demonstration Phase. It includes a discussion “...STOVL JSF DESIGN REQUIREMENTS of the performance methods themselves and the inputs required to run them. The X-32B and X-35B STOVL Concept Demonstrator Aircraft are used as case studies. The design requirements for the Lessons learned from the development of their STOVL performance related STOVL JSF mandated a Vertical Lift databases are discussed. The pre-flight test STOVL performance calcu- Bring Back (VLBB) capability of 5,000 lations are compared with the flight test demonstrated performance. .“The nozzle is angled down to To the extent possible, the paper provides a comparison be- lbs of fuel and ordnance on a tropical tween the small-scale and full-scale STOVL database elem- ensure directional control (via NWS) ents, such as hot gas ingestion and propulsion induced day. The STOVL JSF’s empty gross aerodynamics. This background, along with the ex- is maintained during the takeoff roll until weight is 29,735 lbs, and it is equip- periences of other predecessor programs, will rotation. You should also note that the nozzle ped with a lift fan design capable of provide the point-of-departure for STOVL performance estimates during the JSF rotates upward momentarily at the point where producing 39,800 lbs of vertical lift at System Development and Demon- the takeoff rotation occurs. Such movement instan- sea level on a tropical day. An ability stration (SDD) Phase, as well as performance estimates for taneously alters the vertical component of lift between to produce 39,800 lbs of thrust minus any future STOVL aircraft the lift fan and the main engine exhaust thereby contributing 29,735 lbs gross weight and 3,000 lbs development of thrust to safely maneuver the air- programs." to the pitch rotation.” http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic craft equals 7,065 lbs of VLBB. As a .php?f=57&t=25401&p=269833&hilit=rotation#p269833 result the STOVL JSF thirty per-cent more VLBB then the requirements document mandated (Killea). This means in a worst case, sea-based scenario the STOVL JSF is more than capable of conducting a vertical land- ing with 4,000 lbs, vise 2,000 lbs, ord- nance, plus two 325-lb radar missiles, and 2,200 lbs of fuel for an approach, vertical landing, and reserve (Killea)....” THE JSF STOVL PERFORMANCE The STOVL Variant of Joint Strike Fighter: PROCESS FROM SMALL-SCALE DATABASE Are its’ Tactical Compromises Warranted? Written by: Captain [USMC] G.M. Beisbier, TO FLIGHT TEST DEMONSTRATION Nov 2002 01 March 2002 http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc http://pdf.aiaa.org/downloads/2002/CDReadyMBIPL02_686/2002_6002.pdf?CFID=3062772&CFTOKEN=60190979&jsessionid=8c3081cc2ed2274d1857TR ?AD=ADA496827&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf The Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) v2.0.6 / 01 may 10 / greg goebel / public domain http://www.vectorsite.net/avf35.html [3] F-35 IN DEVELOPMENT [Short Take Off - STO] “...* The pilot receives inputs from the F-35's electronic systems using an advanced cockpit lay- out, featuring a full-panel-width "panoramic cockpit display (PCD)", with dimensions of 20 by 50 centimeters (8 by 20 inches), plus a secondary flight display array. It does not have a "head-up display", however, with this function taken over by a "helmet-mounted display (HMD)" being de- veloped by Visions Systems International, a collaboration of Kaiser Electronics and Elbit of Israel. Symbology and imagery can be displayed on both the PCD and HMD. The pilot flies the aircraft with "hands on throttle and stick (HOTAS)" controls; the PCD is touch-sensitive and functions to an extent as a reprogrammable keyboard, resulting in a spare cockpit control layout. The "smarts" of the F-35 will be particularly appreciated by pilots flying the F-35B STOVL version. Short takeoffs in the Harrier are a troublesome affair that require the pilot to have "three hands": one for the throttle, one for the stick, and the third for the lever that controls the direction of the Harrier's swiveling exhaust nozzles. An F-35B pilot, in contrast, flies the plane with stick and throttle, with the software handling the fine details of short takeoff: the pilot will simply press a "button" on the PCD to con- vert from vertical to forward flight or the reverse. While the Harrier has reaction control thrusters driven by engine bleed to provide low-speed maneuverability, the F-35B simply modulates the four points of its vertical-liftsystem--the pivoting exhaust, the two wing exhaust ducts, and the lift fan -- to provide control. This trick would be difficult or impossible to do manually....” Vertical landings hit the mark in F-35B’s tests By Kate Wiltrout The Virginian-Pilot © Oct 20, 2011 http://hamptonroads.com/2011/10/vertical-landings-hit-mark-f35bs-tests “...Engineers initially thought the jet would create far more turbulence on the flight deck because it's much more powerful than the Harrier. Cordell said for the first few flights off the Wasp, the shooter – the flight deck crewmember who taps the flight deck, signaling final permission for pilots to takeoff – was told to tuck his head down, run to the ship's island (superstructure) & hold on for the actual launch. After a num- ber of takeoffs, Cordell said, the shooter said that precaution seemed unnecessary. Couldn't he just hold onto one of the metal rings set into the flight deck, like he did when Harriers launched? The engineers assented. Engineers were also concerned about the forward-most flight deck crewmember – the bow-waver, who signals to the shooter that there's no interference before takeoff. "He is right at the point where the wing is demanding the most lift possible, where you'd expect outwash and potential problems. He stands there as if he has very few cares in the world," Cordell said. Adm. Kevin Scott, the commander of Expeditionary Strike Group Two, seconded that point. "I didn't believe it at first. So I walked up there and stood next to him. It was really impressive," Scott told reporters...... The Wasp has operated as usual, except it's stayed close to shore as a safety precaution in case the jets ran into trouble and needed to land ashore, Holdener said. The most important thing for ships doing air operations is maneuvering themsothe wind passes over the deck. "We chase the wind," she said. In this case, the chasing occurred within a zone eight miles long and 11 miles wide....” THE JSF STOVL [X-35B] PERFORMANCE PROCESS FROM SMALL-SCALE DATABASE TO FLIGHT TEST DEMONSTRATION Kevin M. McCarthy, JSF Program Office/Naval Air Systems Command Nov 2002 http://pdf.aiaa.org/downloads/2002/CDReadyMBIPL02_686/2002_6002.pdf?CFID=3062772&CFTOKEN=60190979&jsessionid=8c3081cc2ed2274d1857TR - “...The STO deck run starts at brake release, which typically occurs at the maximum thrust that the brakes can hold. This is an input. The engine spool-up characteristics from this throttle setting to maximum power are considered during the acceleration portion of the deck run. Weight on main and nose gear is calculated, and must be monitored to maintain adequate deck handling characteristics...... STO demonstrations were a critical aspect of the flight test program as well. The X-35B performed two different technique STOs; 1) fixed nozzle and 2) auto-STOs. The fixed nozzle STOs are self-explanatory, and were used for the initial flight test STO maneuvers. For these maneuvers, the demonstrated performance was very consistent with predicted levels. The flight test auto-STOs featured a deck run nozzle angle (34/28 fan/main) and flyaway nozzle angle between 40/40 and 60/60, depending on aircraft weight. The auto-rotation was pilot actuated at the desired rotation speed....” (1.7Mb PDF) ______ - Navy Sees Few Anomalies in F-35B Ship Trials Oct 24, 2011 By Amy Butler Onboard the USS Wasp: http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/AW_10_24_2011_p30-384427.xml&p=3 “…For testing on the Wasp, the nozzles and control surfaces actuate with 225 ft. of run- way remaining on deck, creating an angle of attack and allowing for the wingstopro- duce enough lift for take-off from the deck, Cordell says. The Harrier’s rotation line is at the bow, owing to its wing design creating the required lift without the corresponding angle-of-attack change. Cordell says that the testing equipment at the ship’s bow has also not detected any problems with the F-35’s nozzle clearance as it takes off….” Computational Analysis of the JSF lift-fan were added to predict the turbulent ship air-wake for Air/Ship Integration: the model to increase the solution has been studied in the past with ¿GHOLW\ considerable success[1–4]. This 2nd Year Report - 2011 has resulted in the use of CFD as an analysis tool to “diagnose” air- Susan A. Polsky US Naval Air 1. Introduction wake structures that may impact Warfare Center, Aircraft Division While many aspects must be taken (NAWCAD), Patuxent River, MD into consideration to ensure safe air operations for both current and VKLSERDUGÀLJKWRSHUDWLRQVD future ship designs. These diagnoses primary factor is evaluation of are accomplished by linking stored Abstract WXUEXOHQWDLUZDNHHϑHFWVRQDLUFUDIW CFD-generated air-wake data with This paper documents the performance and pilot workload. The RϓLQHDLUFUDIWPRGHOVFRQWUROOHGE\ accomplishments from the second air-wake is a product of wind passing either a pilot model or some other year of a three-year Grand Challenge over ship structures creating non- autonomous controller. For this Project focusing on the application XQLIRUPWXUEXOHQWDLUÀRZ7KH86 ³RQHZD\FRXSOHG´DSSURDFKWKHDLU RIFRPSXWDWLRQDOÀXLGG\QDPLFVWR Navy conducts shipboard dynamic wake data is imposed on the aircraft predict coupled ship and aircraft interface (DI) testing to evaluate PRGHO KRZHYHUWKHSUHVHQFHRIWKH aerodynamics. Unstructured VKLSDLUZDNHHϑHFWVRQDLUFUDIW aircraft does not feed back into the chimera techniques were used operations. These tests result air-wake data. While this approach to simulate the coupled ship and LQZLQGRYHUGHFN :2' ÀLJKW KDVSURYHQYHU\XVHIXOWKHUHDUH aircraft systems. Dynamic aircraft envelopes that prescribe in what limitations to its applicability. When maneuvers were prescribed with wind conditions an aircraft can or employing CFD data generated from the intention of building simulations FDQQRWÀ\7KH:2'ÀLJKWHQYHORSHV DVKLSLQLVRODWLRQWKHXQGHUO\LQJ with an auto-pilot-in-the-loop. All are part of the operating procedures assumption is that the presence of simulations were computed in a for all ship-based aircraft. Testing is WKHDLUFUDIWZLOOQRWDϑHFWWKHDLU time-accurate fashion due to the required to generate WOD envelopes wake from the ship structures. In XQVWHDG\QDWXUHRIWKHÀRZ¿HOGDQG for each model of air vehicle the case of a small uninhabited air XVHGWKHFRPPHUFLDOÀRZVROYHU operating from a given ship. The DI YHKLFOH 8$9 WKLVLVOLNHO\DYDOLG Cobalt. Analyses for both vertical WHVWVDUHSHUIRUPHGDWVHDW\SLFDOO\ DVVXPSWLRQ KRZHYHUIRUDQDLUFUDIW shipboard landings of the Joint Strike over the course of several weeks. that produces a large wake of its Fighter (JSF) and rotary-wing aircraft Application of computational RZQ VXFKDVDKHOLFRSWHU WKLV are discussed. Internal components ÀXLGG\QDPLFV &)' PHWKRGVWR assumption becomes less-and-less valid as the aircraft comes in closer QXPHULFDOPRGHOLQJGH¿FLHQFLHVWKDW WRDODQGLQJVSRWWKHDLUFUDIWFRUH proximity to ship structures. The prevent the application of current nozzle passes near many large hull- interaction of the ship air-wake dynamic interface simulations for PRXQWHGV\VWHPVVXFKDVUDGDUV and the aircraft wake is generally ÀLJKWHQYHORSHSUHGLFWLRQ$QDO\VLV DQGZHDSRQU\DQGSDVVHVGLUHFWO\ referred to as ship/aircraft coupling. RIDQ+KHOLFRSWHUZLWKD''* RYHUWKHFDWZDONDQGÀLJKWGHFN Aerodynamic coupling is a concern (destroyer)-class ship was continued Although sub-scale experimental IRUERWK¿[HGZLQJDQGURWDU\ZLQJ in the 2nd year (Figure 1). The VWXGLHVRIWKH6729/RXWZDVK¿HOG shipboard operations. PRWLYDWLRQIRUWKH''*+DQDO\VLV ZHUHFRQGXFWHGWKHVHH[SHULPHQWV $VPHQWLRQHGDERYHSDVW is to understand where (in regards were for zero ambient wind-speed research developed methods to to proximity to a ship) aerodynamic ZLWKH[KDXVWLPSLQJHPHQWRQÀDW accurately predict ship air-wake and coupling becomes important for plates. It was recognized that the air- laid the groundwork for prediction of URWDU\ZLQJYHKLFOHV7KLVNQRZOHGJH ÀRZSDWWHUQVZRXOGOLNHO\EHDϑHFWHG coupled ship & aircraft predictions. DORQJZLWKWKHFRXSOHG''*+ by surrounding ship structures and Research executed in the 2006– CFD data will be used to develop prevailing wind-speed and direction. 2008 time-frame demonstrated methods to account for aerodynamic 7KHUHIRUHWKH&)'DQDO\VHVLQFOXGHG the feasibility of modeling both coupling suitable for man-in-the-loop WKHVKLSKXOOLVODQGVXSHUVWUXFWXUH stationary aircraft and aircraft with VLPXODWLRQV LHPHWKRGVWKDWUXQLQ and many of the larger ship systems prescribed-motion immersed in real-time). in the area of concern (Figure 2). ship air-wake. The aircraft types $QDO\VHVRIWKHVKRUWWDNHRϑ The CFD analyses were used to help H[DPLQHGLQFOXGHG¿[HGZLQJ ) vertical landing (STOVL) JSF on determine whether steps should DQGURWDU\ZLQJ 9+ L-class US Navy ships (Figure 2) be taken to move or shield deck- The present work builds upon past were also conducted. The JSF CFD edge equipment and replace it with research in coupled ship/aircraft analysis was required to prepare the instrumentation to gather data modeling through support from the VKLSIRU-6)WHVWLQJ,QSDUWLFXODU GXULQJÀLJKWWHVWDWVHD,QWKHQG 2ϒFHRI1DYDO5HVHDUFK³&RXSOHG analyses were required to examine \HDURIWKLVSURMHFWVKRUWWDNHRϑ Aircraft Ship Simulation for Improved whether JSF outwash during vertical (STO) scenarios were also examined. Acquisition” (CASSIA) program landings (VL) would damage ,QDGGLWLRQWKH¿GHOLW\RIWKH-6) and the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) FULWLFDO DQGFRVWO\ VKLSV\VWHPV PRGHOZDVVLJQL¿FDQWO\LQFUHDVHGWR program. either due to exposure to hot jet include most of the internal lift-fan The goal of the CASSIA program exhaust or due to the force of the structure. is to understand the physical and jet exhaust. During an approach https://www.hpc.mil/images/hpcdocs/newsroom/ugc_2011_proceedings_small.pdf Jumping Jack Flash July 2014 AIR International F-35 Special Ed. “...As part of the test programme, VX-23 undertook crosswind and tailwind envelope expansion. This in- cluded what Peter Wilson described as “some very interesting test points” with the aircraft positioned with a tailwind – which involved tracking the centreline with various bank angles moving backwards at 25 knots or so, “really testing close to the limits of the propulsion system’s capability. So we’ve hit the corners of the envelope going backwards and sideways”. VX-23 also conducted vertical landings with a 15-knot crosswind and with expected hot gas ingestion from the ship’s funnels. “We’ve completed ex- treme descent rates touching down at 12ft/sec and not exceeded the load limits of the landing gear,” said Wilson. Crosswind testing is an interesting scenario. There are two ways to achieve the required objective. The pilot can generate crosswind in the hover by turning 90-degrees away from a headwind to generate crosswind from the natural wind and then move sideways over the ground to achieve the required test condition. The wind can be forced to come at any angle to the aircraft. The alternate way is to test when the desired wind speed is available natural- ly, pedal turning the aircraft until the direction required by the test point is achieved. “DT II was about crosswind envelope expansion; getting out to 40 knots of headwind; tailwind envelope expansion; and the internal carriage of inert weapons during take-offs and landings for the first time,” said Wilson...... Another aspect of STOVL ops tested during DT II determined the effect of wind coming around the ship’s island. When an aircraft is in the hover, the island is on the right. If the wind comes from the right it makes its way around the island and catches the aircraft from various angles. “That makes the hot gas coming out of the ship’s stack come at you, which is bad news. Aeroplanes don’t like ingesting hot gas: it reduces performance,” said Wilson. “We had mixed results, some good, some bad. With the wind com- ing from ‘round the back of the island, the aeroplane starts to feel like it’s jostling around. And the ef- fects of the hot gas coming from around the front eroded our performance margin, but not to a point we were concerned because the aircraft has the capability to withstand the effects. We opened out to 10 kts of crosswind from the right & 15 kts from the left, which is a super envelope. It was a great success.”…” Jumping Jack Flash PRUQLQJDQGDIWHUQRRQÀLJKWSHUL- before embarkation, the entire Wasp ods available on the ship – which last- ÀLJKWGHFNFUHZFDPHWR3D[IRUDFD- July 2014 unknown author HGIRUXSWR¿YHKRXUVDQGWRRNSODFH GHPLFWUDLQLQJ³:HKDGWKH¿UH¿JKW- AIR International F-35 Special Ed. EHWZHHQ0D\DQG2FWREHU ers learning how to rescue a pilot 1DYDO$LU6\VWHPV&RPPDQG 1$- out of an F-35 – because there are “…The DT I test plan was released as a VAIR) simulators at Pax were devel- so many unique aspects about the 150-page document, one of the most oped for the test mission and can MHW±DQGWKHIXOOGHFNFUHZZLWKWKH complex ever written for any aircraft be linked to the test control rooms air boss and the mini boss running and requiring countless meetings over RQWKHEDVH/DQGLQJ6LJQDO2ϒFHUV RXUÀLJKWSHULRGRQWKHDLU¿HOG´VDLG DQPRQWKSHULRGWR¿QDOLVH0DM /62V DQGFDUULHUVXLWDELOLW\HQJL- 5XVQRN Rusnok said: “That’s a real tribute to neers took part in the simulator train- On the afternoon of October 3, the folks with the knowledge base and ing and provided the calls usual- OHDGJRYHUQPHQW6729/SLORW/W&RO the wherewithal to write that kind of ly made by controllers in the bridge 6FKHQNWRRNRϑIURP3D[5LYHULQ%) VWXϑ´ RIWKHVKLSSULPDU\ÀLJKWFRQWURODQG ÀHZWKHVKRUWGLVWDQFHWRWKH866 WKHWRZHU³:HVWDUWHGZLWKMXVWWKH :DVSXQGHUZD\RϑWKHFRDVWRI:DO- Pilots, Training and Embarkation basic mechanics and worked our way ORSV,VODQG9LUJLQLDÀHZDFRXSOHRI Four pilots were selected for DT I: LQWRVSHFL¿FWHVWSRLQWVHPHUJHQ- passes alongside the ship and then Peter Wilson of BAE Systems and cy procedures and eventually to peri- H[HFXWHGDYHUWLFDOODQGLQJ±WKH¿UVW WKUHH860DULQH&RUSVWHVWSLORWV ods involving every conceivable type aboard an LHD-class ship – to ‘spot /W&RO6FKHQN/W&RO0DWWKHZ.HOO\ RIWHVW - “The Pentagon last month relaxed the performance requirements for the Joint Strike Fighter, allowing the Air Force F-35A variant to exceed its previous combat radius -- a benchmark it previously missed -- and granting the Marine Corps F-35B nearly 10 percent additional runway length for short take-offs, according to Defense Department sources. On Feb. 14, the Joint Requirements Oversight Council -- in a previously unreported development -- agreed to loosen select key performance parameters (KPPs) for the JSF during a review of the program convened in advance of a high-level Feb. 21 Defense Acquisition Board meeting last month, at which the Pentagon aimed to reset many dimensions of the program, including cost and schedule. Pentagon sources said a memorandum codifying the JROC decisions has not yet been signed by Adm. James Winnefeld, the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the JROC chair. Sources familiar with the changes, however, said the JROC -- which also includes the service vice chiefs of staff -- agreed to adjust the "ground rules and assumptions" underlying the F-35A's 590-nautical-mile, combat-radius KPP. Last April, the Pentagon reported to Congress in a selected acquisition report that "based on updated estimate of engine bleed," the F-35A would have a combat radius of 584 nautical miles, below its threshold -- set in 2002 -- of 590 nautical miles. To extend the F-35A's combat radius, the JROC agreed to a less-demanding flight profile that assumes near-ideal cruise altitude and airspeed, factors that permit more efficient fuel consumption. This would allow the estimate to be extended to 613 nautical miles, according to sources familiar with the revised requirement. The estimated combat radius of the short-take-off variant, which is being developed for the Marine Corps, is 15% lower than the original JSF program goal even though the aircraft is slated to carry fewer weapons than originally intended, according to the April report. The short-take-off-and-landing KPP before the JROC review last month was 550 feet. In April 2011, the Pentagon estimated that the STOVL variant could execute a short take-off in 544 feet while carrying two Joint Direct Attack Munitions and two AIM-120 missiles internally, as well as enough fuel to fly 450 nautical miles. By last month, that take-off distance estimate grew to 568 feet, according to DOD sources. The JROC, accordingly, agreed to extend the required take-off distance to 600 feet, according to DOD officials. The JROC review of the F-35 program last month was held in accordance with a policy adopted by the council in June 2010, which requires a reassessment of requirements for all programs with cost growth exceeding 25 percent of the original program baseline. One goal of the policy is to determine whether a decision to relax requirements should be made to improve acquisition cost and schedule estimates.”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x Summary IW672ZLWK IXOOH[SHQGDEOHVH[HFXWH VIXOOH[SHQGDEOHV VIXOOH[SHQGDEOHV “December 2014 -'$0 HTXLYDOHQWV DIRRW 8. H[HFXWHDIRRW H[HFXWHDIRRW (for 2015) DOT&E LQWHUQDO /RJLVWLFV)RRWSULQW6729/9DULDQW/&ODVV 6729/ 672IURP/+$ 8.6729/ 672IURP 8.6729/ 672IURP Report ...In sum- $,0 /HVVWKDQRUHTXDOWR /HVVWKDQRUHTXDOWR /HVVWKDQRUHTXDOWR 7%' /HVVWKDQRU /+'DQGDLUFUDIWFDUULHUV /+$/+'DQGDLUFUDIW /+$/+'DQGDLUFUDIW mary, the F-35 LQWHUQDO IXHO program is show- FXIW67 FXIW67 FXIW67 HTXDOWR VHDOHYHOWURSLFDOGD\ FDUULHUV VHDOHYHO FDUULHUV VHDOHYHO WRIO\QP ing steady pro- FXIW NWVRSHUDWLRQDO:2' DQG WURSLFDOGD\NWV WURSLFDOGD\NWV gress in all areas – including development, 67 ZLWKDFRPEDWUDGLXVRI RSHUDWLRQDO:2' DQG RSHUDWLRQDO:2' DQG flight test, production, maintenance, and QP 6729/SURILOH ZLWKDFRPEDWUDGLXVRI ZLWKDFRPEDWUDGLXVRI stand-up of the global sustainment enter- 6RUWLH*HQHUDWLRQ5DWHV&72/9DULDQW $OVRPXVWSHUIRUP6729/ QP 6729/SURILOH QP 6729/SURILOH prise. The program is currently on the right track and will continue to deliver on the $6' $6' $6' 7%' YHUWLFDOODQGLQJZLWKWZR $OVRPXVWSHUIRUP $OVRPXVWSHUIRUP $6' -'$0VDQGWZR 6729/YHUWLFDOODQGLQJ 6729/YHUWLFDOODQGLQJ commitments that have been made to the F-35 Enterprise. As with any big, complex 6RUWLH*HQHUDWLRQ5DWHV&99DULDQW LQWHUQDO$,0VIXOO ZLWKWZR-'$0V ZLWKWZR-'$0V development program, there will be challeng- H[SHQGDEOHVDQGIXHOWR DQGWZRLQWHUQDO$,0 DQGWZRLQWHUQDO$,0 es and obstacles. However, we have the $6' $6' $6' 7%' IO\WKH6729/5HFRYHU\ VIXOOH[SHQGDEOHV VIXOOH[SHQGDEOHV ability to overcome any current and future $6' SURILOH DQGIXHOWRIO\WKH6729/ DQGIXHOWRIO\WKH6729/ issues, and the superb capabilities of the 5HFRYHU\SURILOH 5HFRYHU\SURILOH F-35 are well within reach for all of us.”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http:// &KDQJH([SODQDWLRQV &9$LUFUDIW&DUULHU6XLWDEOH9DULDQW-'$0-RLQW'LUHFW$WWDFN0XQLWLRQV www.f-16. &K 7KHELJJHVWIDFWRUFDXVLQJWKHFKDQJHZDVGDWDPDWXUDWLRQIURPUHFHQWIOLJKWWHVWGDWDZKLFKUHVXOWHGLQDORZHULQJ .76.QRWV RIWKHIXHOIORZIDFWRUPDUJLQIURPDaWRDPDUJLQ/RZHUIXHOEXUQPHDQVJUHDWHUUDQJH672GLVWDQFHLVWLHGWRD 101DXWLFDO0LOHV net/forum/ WDNHRIIZHLJKWIRUDIL[HGPLVVLRQUDGLXV/HVVIXHOZDVQHHGHGVROHVVZHLJKWDQGORZHU672GLVWDQFH 5&/:5HTXLUHG&DUULHU/DQGLQJ:HLJKW676KRUW7RQV download/ 1RWHV 6726KRUW7DNHRII file.php? 7KH)3URJUDPLVFXUUHQWO\LQGHYHORSPHQWDOWHVWLQJDQGZLOOSURYLGHGHPRQVWUDWHGSHUIRUPDQFHZLWKWKH%ORFN) 6729/6KRUW7DNHRIIDQG9HUWLFDO/DQGLQJ9SD0D[$SSURDFK6SHHG IXOO FDSDELOLW\DLUFUDIW :2':LQG2YHUWKH'HFN id=20510 SAR for F-35 | As of December 31, 2011 page 6: http://www.aviationweek.com/media/pdf/F-35Dec11FINALSAR-senttoCongress3-29-2012.pdf - “...On February 14, 2012, the Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC) met and made some important decisions regarding the F-35 Key Performance Parameters (KPPs). The impetus for these changes was guidance from the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who chairs the JROC. The VCJCS asked programs to examine portfolios for KPPs that could potentially be modified based on observed performance or changes in concepts of operation with minimal or no impact on the warfighter that could substantially reduce the cost of a program. This effort is in keeping with the JROC’s statutory requirement to consider cost, schedule and performance. Agreement was reached to modify the following: a) revise a Ground Rule and Assumption (GR&A) for the F-35A Combat Radius. The GR&As underpinning the KPP were updated to reflect the aircraft optimum airspeed and altitude, values that have been obtained through testing. Once these values were applied to the mission profile, the performance of the aircraft exceeded the original, unchanged KPP value, and b) approved a change to the F-35B Short Takeoff distance KPP from 550ft to 600ft. The STOVL variant (F-35B) 550ft short takeoff KPP was based on a four-ship simultaneous launch concept, formerly planned for use by the AV-8B. This concept is no longer in use. Planned F-35B operations (and the way AV-8B’s currently operate) are for a maximum of two aircraft to depart from the ship, and increase the length of useable flight deck. This increased distance facilitated the addition of 50ft to the original, no- longer-relevant 550ft requirement, resulting in significant savings to the taxpayer. Attempting to achieve the original requirement would have required significant resources (e.g. more engine thrust or significant weight reductions), and would have resulted in excessive cost growth. The JROC Memorandum (040-12) that approved these changes was signed on March 16, 2012. Current estimates for all KPP are now within threshold requirements....” STOVL MODE Transtion / HOOK Button Landing Gear http://www.codeone magazine.com/images/ Control media/Front_Office_01 (Down) _1267828237_9142.JPG 3LORWVEHJLQIOLJKWVLQQHZ)/LJKWQLQJ,, 7KHUHIXUELVKHGVLPXODWRUZLOOWHVWSLORWV¶VNLOOVWRWKHOLPLWVDVWKH\SUDFWLVHODQGLQJRQWKH GHFNRIWKHQHZDLUFUDIWFDUULHULQDUDQJHRIGLIILFXOWV HDDQGZHDWKHUFRQGLWLRQVSURYLGHG VLPXODWRULQSUHSDUDWLRQIRUWULDOVRQFDUULHU E\WKHVLPXODWRU 0DU 7KHEHVSRNH 0VLPXODWRUIDFLOLW\RIIHUVDGHJUHHLPPHUVLYHH[SHULHQFHIRUSLORWVWRIO\ WKHMHWWRDQGIURPWKH8.FDUULHU,WFRPSULVHVDFRFNSLWPRYHGE\DQHOHFWURQLFPRWLRQ SODWIRUPDQGDIXOOUHSUHVHQWDWLRQRIWKHVKLS¶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µ:L]]HU¶:LOVRQ%$(6\VWHPV¶WHVWSLORWIRUWKHVKRUWWDNHRIIDQGYHUWLFDOODQGLQJ YDULDQWRQWKH)SURJUDPPHVDLGWKHVLPXODWRUWULDOVZLOOSURYLGHHQJLQHHUVZLWKWKHGDWD Pilots begin WREHJLQIOLJKWWULDOVRQ+064XHHQ(OL]DEHWKWKH)LUVWRI&ODVVDLUFUDIWFDUULHULQ flights in new F-35 Lightning II simulator +HVDLG ³7KHLPPHUVLYHH[SHULHQFHLVDVQHDUWRWKHUHDOWKLQJDVSRVVLEOH7KHGDWDZLOO https://www.youtube.c VKRZXVH[DFWO\ZKDWZLOOKDSSHQZKHQ)SLORWVIO\WRDQGIURPWKH4XHHQ(OL]DEHWK om/watch?v=iAPcvOGZ-hY FDUULHUV7KHWULDOVZHFDQUXQWKURXJKWKHVLPXODWRUDUHIDUPRUHH[WHQVLYHWKDQZKDWZHZLOO GRLQWKHDFWXDOIOLJKWWULDOVEHFDXVHZHFDQUXQDQGUHUXQHDFKWULDOXQWLOZHKDYHDOOWKH http://www.baesystems.com/en/article/pilots-begin-flights-in-new- GDWDZHQHHG7KHVLPXODWRUSURYLGHVJUHDWHUFRVWHIILFLHQF\IRUWKHRYHUDOOSURJUDPPHDQG f-35-lightning-ii-simulator-in-preparation-for-trials-on-carrier LVH[WUHPHO\LPSRUWDQWWRWKHVXFFHVVRIWKHILUVWIOLJKWWULDOV´ $ZRUOGOHDGLQJIOLJKWHQJLQHHULQJVLPXODWRU 2YHUWKHODVW\HDUV%$(6\VWHPV¶IOLJKWVLPXODWLRQKDVEHHQXVHGWRVXSSRUWWKHGHVLJQ FUHDWHGE\%$(6\VWHPVLVUHDG\WREH³IORZQ´ DQGGHYHORSPHQWRIWKHLQWHUIDFHEHWZHHQWKH)DQGWKH8.¶VQH[WJHQHUDWLRQRIDLUFUDIW E\)/LJKWQLQJ,,SLORWVIRUWKHILUVWWLPHDV FDUULHUV WKH\SUHSDUHIRUIOLJKWWULDOVRQWKH8.¶VQHZ 7KHQHZVLPXODWRUUHSODFHVDSUHYLRXVYHUVLRQZKLFKZDVILUVWEXLOWLQWKH VWRGHYHORS WHFKQRORJ\IRUWKH+DUULHUMXPSMHWDQGWKH+DZNDGYDQFHGMHWWUDLQHUEHIRUHEHLQJ 4XHHQ(OL]DEHWK&ODVVDLUFUDIWFDUULHUQH[W\HDU FRQYHUWHGIRU) JRWWKHFKDQFHWRH[SHULHQFHZKDWLWIHHOVOLNHWRÀ\DVWDWHRIWKHDUW$PHULFDQ)¿JKWHUSODQH 7KHVN\¶VWKHOLPLWIRU¿JKWHU It turns out BAE Systems at Samlesbury, who make part of the )VEHIRUHWKH\DUHÀRZQRXWWR$PHULFDIRU¿QDODVVHPEO\ pilot David — 02 Jul 2014 have a unique bit of kit. At the Warton site there is a massive full-wall computer mock-up of one of the new Queen Elizabeth aircraft carriers and an F-35 simulator. It’s the only set-up of its kind in the world - and I was invited to try it out. 7KH¿UVW4XHHQ(OL]DEHWKDLUFUDIWFDUULHULVEHLQJEXLOWQRZDQGLVGXHWREHQDPHGE\+HU0DMHVW\ herself at Rosyth, Scotland, on Friday. The old Harrier Jump Jets which the RAF used from aircraft carriers in the past are to be replaced with the F-35, whcih have a similar vertical landing capability. So the RAF and BAE Systems have set up the simulator at Warton so pilots know exactly how the F-35 will perform, and how it will land on the new carriers. The F-35 can carry out a conventional landing or a vertical landing - but no-one has ever tried it for UHDORQWKHQHZ4XHHQ(OL]DEHWKFDUULHUV7KHPDQWDVNHGZLWK¿QGLQJRXWWKHEHVWZD\WRGRLWLV 7KH%ULWLVK$HURVSDFH)ÀLJKWVLPXODWRUDW:DUWRQQHDU3UHVWRQZKLFKLVWUDLQLQJSLORWVWR test pilot Lieutenant Commander Barry Issitt. The Royal Navy pilot’s job is to draw up best practice land on the new HMS Queen Elizabeth aircraft carrier which is being built in Rosyth, Scotland. /DQFDVKLUH(YHQLQJ3RVWEXVLQHVVHGLWRU'DYLG1RZHOOSUHSDUHVIRUKLVÀLJKW and advise on any snags. The set-up is stunning. Along a massive wall is a curved screen which shows the deck of a Queen As part of our Dream Jobs features series, DAVID NOWELL dons his http://www. Elizabeth carrier. The detail is stunning - and the operators can simulate night, day, bad weather, 5D\%DQVDQGH[SHULHQFHVOLIHDVD¿JKWHUSLORWDOEHLWLQWKH anything realistically. simulator. lep.co.uk/ In the adjoining room is the F-35 simulator in front of a similar but smaller curved screen. In the &DOOLWDÀLJKWRIIDQF\EXW,¶YHDOZD\VZDQWHGWREHD¿JKWHUSLORW news/ distance is the aircraft carrier - and that’s what you are aiming for. But like many young lads, my hopes of becoming a “Top Gun” pilot, a business/ The F-35s are expected to queue up and land vertically in groups of four. Looks relatively easy in premiership footballer or a globe-trotting multi-millionaire playboy never the-sky-s- SHUIHFWZHDWKHUEXWWU\GRLQJLWLQDPDMRUVWRUPRUXQGHUHQHP\¿UH quite materialised. the-limit-for- Barry’s job is to perfect all scenarios - after all, the lives of the pilots and 1,000 crew on the largest Instead, I went from rubbish sixth form student and trainee golf course Royal Navy aircraft carriers ever built are at stake. groundsman to trainee journalist. Despite having several friends in the fighter-pilot- armed forces, newspapers became my life rather than death-defying david-1- ³7KHUHDUHQRWZRVHDWHUDLUFUDIWVRHYHU\SLORWZKRLVWU\LQJWKLVZLOOEHH[SHULHQFLQJÀ\LQJLWIRUWKH VXSHUVRQLFÀLJKWVLQPXOWLPLOOLRQSRXQG5$)MHWV ¿UVWWLPH´VD\V%DUU\ 6705787 Funny how life works out - because if I wasn’t a journalist I would not have “It is important to make sure that every aspect is rigorously tested.” 7KHPDLQURRPIHDWXUHVWKHVFHQHIURPWKHFDUULHU¶VSHUVSHFWLYH7KHFDUULHU¶VDLUWUDI¿FFRQWUROOHU \RXFRXOGPRYHZLWKWZR¿QJHUVLIQHFHVVDU\ZLWKRXWDQ\ZLOGPRYHPHQWV has to monitor the landing of each plane - and has the power to order them to abort if anything goes wrong. We’re off, trying to keep speed level and height constant. Barry gives me the controls and we immediately tilt to the right like the amateur that I am. BAE Systems’ David Atkinson, who is leading aircraft to ship integration on the F-35 programme, said: “This system is running the same software as the aircraft itself, so it is just about as authentic 0RYLQJWKHMR\VWLFNWRWKHOHIWZHOHYHORIIDQGWKH¿JKWHUKXUWOHVWRZDUGVWKHFDUULHU%DUU\WHOOVPHWR as it can be. nudge the joystick forward, losing height. “The simulator is helping to form policy and best practice for the future.” The Throttle is gradually eased off. The carrier’s lights are blinking in the distance. 7KH)LVDVWXQQLQJ¿JKWHUSODQHSDFNHGZLWKWHFKQRORJ\,WSHUIRUPVDGLIIHUHQWIXQFWLRQWR%$( This feels like the best computer game you have every played. It’s a virtual reality experience, and Systems’ Typhoon and has been chosen as the replacement to the Harrier Jump Jet. DIWHUDZKLOH\RXUHDOLVHWKDWWKHSODQHLVVRVPDUWLWFDQSUDFWLFDOO\À\LWVHOI ,W¶VGLI¿FXOWWRSLQDQ\RQHGRZQRQH[DFWO\KRZPXFKHDFKSODQHFRVWVWKDWGHSHQGVRQWKHQXPEHU “Don’t ditch in the sea” is the thought going round in my mind. “Hang on, it isn’t real” says another you buy, the service agreements etc. But it is generally reckoned that you won’t get much change voice. But it feels like it. out of £100 million. Screeching alongside the carrier far too fast, we cut the speed. Amazingly the plan hovers. It doesn’t Says Barry: “I never ask how much they cost - I don’t want to think about it! go right, left or back. It just stays there. ³:HDOOKDYHRXUIDYRXULWHVWKLVLVYHU\YHU\GLIIHUHQWWRWKHRWKHUSODQHV,KDYHÀRZQ,W¶VGLI¿FXOWWR At 100 feet above the sea I am given a landing bay to aim for. Nudging the joystick right, the plane compare to the Typhoon, but as far as capability is concerned it is better than anything else in moves sideways like it is on rails, not losing an inch of height. production.” It is so intuitive it practically parks itself (unlike my battered Peugeot, which has the battle scars to Pilots normally train on the Hawk and then a select few will move up, depending on their skills, to the prove it. But that’s a different story). 7\SKRRQ(YHQIHZHUZLOOEHDEOHWRWDNHWKHFRQWUROVRID)&RPPRQO\LWZLOOWDNHWKUHHWR¿YH Over the carrier’s deck, I am told to drop. Another nudge on the joystick and the plane is down with a \HDUVRIÀ\LQJEHIRUHSURJUHVVLQJWRVRPHWKLQJOLNHWKH) UHDOLVWLFEXPS$QGWKDW¶VLWSUREDEO\WKHPRVWDGYDQFHG¿JKWHUSODQHLQWKHZRUOGLVGRZQZLWKRXW “Right,” says Barry. “What it’s taken me six years to learn I’ll try to teach you in 10 minutes.” incident. He gives me the conducted tour of the simulator’s cockpit and an expert run-through the landing Amazingly, it seems like I have the Right Stuff. procedure and then it’s my turn. I failed miserably in my attempts to become a postman some years ago - being rejected for interview Clambering into the cockpit, you realise the simulator is frighteningly realistic. You see all the every single time. instruments exactly as the pilot would (although it real life some readings would be projected inside %XWLWVHHPVP\¿YH2/HYHOV WKDW¶V*&6(VWR\RX\RXQJHUIRON ZRXOGQRWEDUPHIURPWUDLQLQJDVD the pilot’s helmet). pilot. 6RPHRIWKHFODVVL¿HGIHDWXUHVKDYHEHHQUHPRYHGIRUVHFXULW\UHDVRQVDQGWKHUHDUHQR³PLVVLOHV´ It’s funny old world. http://www.lep.co for me to unleash on the Lancashire public. Which must be a relief to all concerned. I’m keeping my mobile switched on just in case I get the call. Sitting there realising you are the controls of the £100m plane is a strange feeling. The sky above .uk/news/ you, the sea below, the carrier in the distance all look lifelike. The cockpit is surprisingly stripped It can only be a matter of time...... down - rudder to the left, joystick to the right. business/the-sky-s-the The controls are very intuitive - the throttle drops into positions like a car’s gear lever. The joystick -limit-for-fighter-pilot-david-1-6705787 VX-23 2015 STRIKE TEST NEWS Maj M. Andrew “Tac” Tacquard F-35[B] Short Takeoff & Vertical Landing (STOVL) Mode http://issuu.com/nawcad_pao/docs/striketest2015_single - “The F-35B team continued to expand the STOVL envelope last year in the clean wing configuration and with symmetric and asymmetric external stores. The process began with flying qualities testing in semi-jet, short takeoff, and jet borne modes to clear the aircraft for takeoff and landings. The team completed testing at airspeeds as low as 70 knots with 24,000 lb of asymmetry and jet borne with 10,000 lb of asymmetry. Next year, the team will feature jet borne testing to 19,000 lb of asymmetry. Flying qualities during asymmetric testing were nearly identical to symmetric testing from the pilot’s perspective. The team performed Rolling Vertical Landings (RVL), Creeping Vertical Landings (CVL), Vert- ical Landings (VL), Slow Landings (SL), and Short Take Offs (STO) tests with nominal winds at Patuxent River. They continued landing and takeoff testing during a detachment to Edwards AFB, Air Force Plant 42 in Palmdale, California, and at NAWS China Lake. Testers focused on expanding the crosswind envelope with crosswinds of up to 25 knots. We also performed the 1st high altitude CVL & VL during the detachment. The test team also conducted mission systems testing in the STOVL environment. Together, we accomplished Daytime STOVL Distributed Aperture System (DAS) testing dur- ing VLs. Additionally, we completed Nighttime DAS and Night Vision Camera (NVC) testing with the GEN III helmet. Testing included main runway-aided conventional takeoff and land- ings, SLs, & STOs. The team also conducted aided STOs and VLs during field carrier landing practice sessions at the expeditionary airfield aboard NAS Patuxent River. Last, the first-ever F-35B ski jumps made aviation history June 19 and July 10 at the NAS Patuxent River Expeditionary Airfield. The ski jump tests — major milestones achieved by the joint U.S.-U.K. ski jump team — will determine the aircraft’s compatibility with British and Italian aircraft carriers. (The U.K. and Italy use the ski jump approach to carrier operations as an alternative to the catapults used aboard U.S. aircraft carriers. The U.K. and Italian carriers feature upward-sloped ramps at the bow of their ships. A ski-jump ramp simultaneously launches aircraft upward and forward, allowing aircraft to take off with more weight and less end-speed than required for an unassisted horizontal launch.)” ALL AT SEA – F-35B/F-35C test update SHOWCASE 2016 SYLVIA PIERSON AEROSPACE TESTING INTERNATIONAL "2015 has proved to be a busy and record-breaking year for the team responsible for testing naval variants of the F-35 Lightning II... “SINCE 2010 THE PAX ITF HAS FLOWN MORE THAN 1,800 TEST FLIGHTS, LOGGED 2,544 TEST HOURS & COMPLETED 12,800 F-35B TEST POINTS, DIRECTLY RESULTING IN THE USMC IOC FLIGHT CLEARANCE ...The PAX ITF is now 100% complete with its second phase of F-35C testing, conducted aboard USS Dwight D. Eisenhower (CVN 69) from October 2-10, 2015 – the team conducted 66 catapults and 66 arrestments across 17 flights, logging 26.5 flight hours & achieving a total of 280 flight test points and 17 logistics test and evaluation (LT&E) test points...... WET RUNWAY, BRAKING VALIDATION & HIGH CROSSWIND TESTING ITF testers proved the aircraft can stop safely in extreme weather conditions and validated the aircraft envelope out to a 25-knot crosswind with high asymmetric air-to-ground loadings. Even in a maximum asymmetry configuration (up to 26,000 lb·ft) with weapons stores on one wing, the aircraft performed well – in fact, the high asymmetry and crosswind required little additional attention from the pilot...... F-35 STOVL MODE TESTING The PAX ITF continued to expand the STOVL envelope last year in the clean wing configuration & with symmetric and asymmetric external stores. Flying qualities testing featured semi-jet, short take-off & jetborne modes to clear the aircraft for take-off & landi- ngs and airspeeds as low as 70kts with 24,000 lb of asymmetry and jet borne with 10,000 lb of asymmetry. The team performed rolling vertical landings (RVL), creeping vertical landings (CVL), vertical landings (VL), high altitude CVLs & VLs, slow landings (SL), & short take-off (STO) tests with nominal winds & crosswinds of up to 25kts. Test pilots reported that flying qualities during asymmetric testing were nearly identical to those in symmetric testing...... F-35C CARRIER SUITABILITY TESTING As the team prepared to sail aboard USS Eisenhower (CVN 69) for the second phase of developmental test (DT-II) of the F-35C, it completed prerequisite shore-based catapults and arrested landings, a structural survey with mis-serviced landing gear, and put the GEN III helmet-mounted display (HMD) hardware through ‘shake, rattle and roll’ tests. ‘Shakes’ are unique test events accom- plished at the shore-based TC-7 Catapult and Mk-7 Arresting Gear sites, during which new aircraft hardware is tested to the air- craft limits for various shipboard conditions. Typically shakes testing is the last requirement prior to clearance for hardware to operate on the ship. The team’s primary DT-II goal was to generate at-sea data in support of phase II development of Aircraft Launch and Recovery Bulletins. They also conducted afterburner catapult shots, Delta Flight Path (DFP) approach mode performance testing with a four degree glideslope, day and night Gen III helmet testing, max catapult shots with full internal weapons load, maintenance engine runs, Integrated Power Pack (IPP) and engine runs in the hangar bay, catapult minimum energy shots with internal stores, and night approaches and arrested landings....” )%&203/(7(6'7,,,21866$0(5,&$ '7,,,ZDVDJUHDWVXFFHVVDFKLHYLQJSULPDU\'7,,,IOLJKWWHVWSRLQWVDVZHOODVQXPHURXVDGGLWLRQDO %\7RGG0LOOHU http://www.sldinfo.com/ PLOHVWRQHVIRUWKH)% f-35b-completes-dt-iii-on-uss-america/ 7KHIRXUWKVKLSWRFDUU\WKHQDPHWKH866$PHULFD /+$ VHUYHVDVWKHIODJVKLSIRUDQHZFODVVRI 6KLSERUQHLQWHJUDWLRQRI$XWRQRPLF/RJLVWLFV,QIRUPDWLRQ6\VWHP $/,6 9 DPSKLELRXVDVVDXOWVKLSVWKDWLVEXLOWVSHFLILFDOO\WRVXSSRUW³DHULDODVVDXOW´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’d deploy tomorrow. WRVXSSRUWWKHPDLQWHQDQFHSKDVHRI'7,,, 90;DOVRSDUWLFLSDWHGLQRSHUDWLRQDODFWLYLW\LQSUHSDUDWLRQIRUWKH)%VILUVWVKLSERUQHGHSOR\PHQWLQ Tomorrow. DERXWD\HDU The commanding officer (CO) of VFMA-211 is chomping at the bit, he would deploy them. '7,,,HYDOXDWHGDQGYDOLGDWHGWKH6KRUW7DNHRIIDQG9HUWLFDO/DQGLQJ 6729/ SHUIRUPDQFHRIWKH) %LQKLJKVHDVWDWHVZLWKIXOOZHDSRQVORDGV H[WHUQDO LQWHUQDO ZLWKDV\PPHWULFORDGLQJ So would the CO of VFMA 121. LQFOXGLQJWDNLQJRIIZLWKDIXOOORDGRIH[WHUQDOVMHWWLVRQLQJRQHVLGHDQGODQGLQJ OLYHZHDSRQVDQG QLJKWRSHUDWLRQV They are ready. 2QERDUGPDLQWHQDQFHDFWLYLWLHVLQYROYHGWKHHQWLUHUHSODFHPHQWRIDQHQJLQHGULYHVKDIWDQGOLIWIDQRQRQHRI These airplanes are highly capable and ready to go.” WKH90;DLUFUDIW 7KHSRWHQW860&861DPSKLELRXVDVVDXOWSODWIRUPRI)%V09%V$+=8+<DQGLQ\HDUVWR $IWHUUHSODFHPHQWWKH90;DLUFUDIWZDVIORZQRIIWKHGHFN FRPH&+.ZLOOVRRQEHVDLOLQJWKHVHDV 860&90;&RPPDQGLQJ2IILFHU&RO*HRUJH³6DFN´ ,WLVQDWXUDOWRUHFRJQL]HWKHSODWIRUPVVXSSRUWRIDEURDGVSHFWUXPRIPLOLWDU\RSHUDWLRQVDQGPLVVLRQV 5RZHOOQRWHGWKDWthe F-35B will equal or exceed the ship- +RZHYHULWLVLPSRUWDQWQRWWRRYHUORRNWKHUROHWKHDVVDXOWFDUULHUV /+' SODWIRUPVKDYHKLVWRULFDOO\SOD\HG DQGZLOOFRQWLQXHWRSOD\ NHHSLQJVHDODQHVIUHHDQGRSHQIRUPRYHPHQWRIJOREDOFRPPHUFHDQGVXSSRUWLQJ borne operational capabilities of the AV-8B Harrier in high GHOLYHU\DURXQGWKHJOREHRIKXPDQLWDULDQDLGIROORZLQJQDWXUDOGLVDVWHUV sea states. Flight operations took place in winds of up to 7KHRQJRLQJVXFFHVVRIWKH860&LQWURGXFWLRQRIWKH)%IOHHWVSHDNVWRDFHUWDLQUHDOLW\ 47 knots from various angles, a deck roll of 5° and deck ,QVKRUWRUGHUWKH866$PHULFD DQGFRPSDQLRQVKLSV ZLOOEHDIRUHERGLQJSUHVHQFHWRVRPHDQGD pitch of 3°. Maintenance work was accomplished (albeit ZHOFRPHIULHQGWRRWKHUV with challenges) while the ship was rolling 9°! USMC STO KPP DEFINITION: https://acc.dau.mil/ILC_KPP http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-KbjKiZgncPc/T1bmdAOy7mI/AAAAAAAAA1w/os-azOiQdeA/s1600/LHD-w-F35-takeoff-KPP.jpg Those attributes or characteristics of a system that are considered critical or essential LHA change to the development of an effective military capability. A KPP normally has a threshold, from representing the required value, and an objective, representing the desired value. KPPs are contained in the Capability Development Document (CDD) and the Capability 550 feet to Production Document (CPD) and are included verbatim in the Acquisition Program 600 feet Baseline (APB). Certain KPPs may be “mandatory” or “selectively applied,” depend- ing on the system. See Validation Authority, Capability Development Document, Cap- KPP change ability Production Document, Mandatory Key Performance Parameters (KPPs), Select- ively Applied KPPs, threshold value, objective value, and Joint Potential Designator. (Source: DAU Glossary of Defense Acquisition Acronyms & Terms) Those attributes or characteristics of a system that are considered critical or essential to the development of an effective military capability and those attributes that make a significant contribution to the characteristics of the future joint force as defined in the Capstone Concept for Joint Operations. KPPs must be testable to enable feedback from test and evaluation efforts to the requirements process. KPPs are validated by the Joint Requirement Oversight Council (JROC) for JROC Interest documents, and by the DOD component for Joint Integration, Joint Information, or Independent documents. Capability development and capability production document KPPs are included verbatim in the acquisition program baseline. (Source:CJCSI 3170.01G – Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System, 1 March 2009) GENERAL INFORMATION/NARRATIVE The CDD and CPD state the operational and sustainment-related performance attributes of a system(s) that provides the capabilities required by the warfighter – attributes so significant they must be verified by testing and evaluation or analysis. KPPs are those attributes or characteristics of a system that are considered critical or essential to the development of an effective military capability and those attributes that make a significant contribution to the characteristics of the future joint force as defined in the CCJO. The CDD and CPD identify the attributes that contribute most significantly to the desired operational capability in threshold-objective format. Whenever possible, attributes should be stated in terms that reflect the range of military operations that the capabilities must support and the joint operating environment intended for the system (family of systems (FoS) or system of systems (SoS)). There are compatibility and interoperability attributes (e.g., databases, fuel, transportability, ammunition) that might need to be identified for a capability to ensure its effectiveness. These statements will guide the acquisition community in making tradeoff decisions between the threshold and objective values of the stated attributes. Because operational testing will assess the ability of the system(s) to meet the production threshold values as defined by the KPPs, Key System Attributes (KSAs), and other performance attributes, these attributes must be testable. KPPs are those system attributes considered most critical or essential for an effective military capability. The CDD and the CPD must contain sufficient KPPs to capture the minimum operational effectiveness, suitability, and sustainment attributes needed to achieve the overall desired capabilities for the system (or systems if the CDD/CPD describes an SoS) during the applicable increment. Failure to meet a CDD or CPD KPP threshold may result in a reevaluation or reassessment of the program or a modification of the production increments. (Source: Manual for the Operation of the Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDS) - Updated February 2009) DAU: http://acqnotes.com/acqnote/acquisitions/key-perfrormance-parameter Key Performance Parameters (KPP) are key system capabilities that must be meet in or- der for a system to meet its operational goals. The Capability Development Document (CDD) and Capability Production Document (CPD) identify the KPP(s) that contribute to the desired operational capability in a threshold and objective format. Each KPP is sup- ported by operationally analysis that takes into account technology maturity, fiscal con- straints, and schedule before determining threshold and objective values...... The threshold value of a KPP or KSA is the minimum acceptable value consider- ed cost, schedule, and technology. Performance below the threshold value is not op- erationally effective or suitable. A KPP also has an objective value that is the desired operational goal considering cost, schedule, and technology. Performance above the objective value does not justify additional expense. The difference between the threshold and objective values sets the trade space. All KPPs and KSA’s are validated by the Joint Requirement Oversight Council (JROC). Advances in technology or changes to system goals may result in changes to the KPP and KSA threshold and objective values which will have to be validated by the JROC again. Below are the list of mandatory KPP that every system shall have according to the JCIDS Manual – Enclosure B, Appendix A. Mandatory Key Performance Parameters (KPP): • Force Protection and Survivability • Selectively Applied • Net-Ready • System Training • Sustainment • Energy Efficiency...” Scorecard: A Case study of the Joint Strike Fighter Program pages 10-11 by Geoffrey P. Bowman, LCDR, USN — 2008 April http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_download-id-14791.html [PDF 325Kb 'bowman0558.pdf'] - "...Navy Mission Needs and Specific Performance Parameters The Navy needs a fifth generation stealth fighter/attack platform to replace its aging legacy F/A-18 A-C models and to comple- ment the F/A-18 E/F. It is essential that the JSF work seamlessly with organic Carrier Strike Group assets as well as other assets within the joint and combined force structure. The Naval variant must have full interoperability within the C4ISR struct- ure. In addition, CV variant must be capable of operating from both current CVN class carriers as well as future CVX models. The capability to operate from a carrier is not as easy as it sounds. Additional weight comes in the form of stronger land- ing gear, fuselage center barrel strength, arresting hook structure, and additional electrical power requirements. The Navy has added approach speed as a service specific key performance parameter. The threshold for approach speed is 145 knots with 15 knots of wind over the deck. This must be possible at Required Carrier Landing Weight (RCLW). The RCLW is the sum of the aircraft operating weight, the minimum required bringback, and enough fuel for two instrument approaches and a 100nm BINGO profile to arrive at a divert airfield with 1000 pounds of fuel. The minimum required bringback is two 2000 pound air-to-ground weapons and two AIM-120s. The Navy further requires that the CV JSF be capable of carrier recovery with internal and external stores; the external stations must have 1000 pound capability on the outboard stations and maximum station carriage weight on the inboard. -Marine Corps Needs and Specific Performance Parameters The Marine Corps requires a Short Take-Off and Landing (STOVL) multi-role fighter to replace its aging AV-8B as well as its conventional F/A-18 A-C aircraft. The USMC variant must be able to operate from expeditionary airfields, Amphibious Assault Ships, and current and future Aircraft Carriers. The JSF must be able to meet or exceed legacy aircraft capability while incor- porating stealth technology. It must further be fully integrated into the joint C4ISR architecture. The Marine Corps has the added requirement of STOVL performance to address. The USMC has added STOVL perform- ance as a service specific key performance parameter. The requirement is listed as follows: With two 1000# JDAMs & two internal AIM-120s, full expendables, execute a 550 [now 600] foot (450 UK STOVL) STO from LHA, LHD, and aircraft carriers (sea level, tropical day, 10 kts operational WOD) & with a combat radius of 450 nm (STOVL profile). Also must perform STOVL vertical landing with two 1000# JDAMs & two internal AIM-120s, full expendables, and fuel to fly the STOVL Recovery profile. The Marine Corps has used the more limiting deck launch, rather than a simple expeditionary airfield, to frame its requirement....” Winner Take All AIR & SPACE MAGAZINE | JANUARY 2003 All the nail biting, second guessing, and sheer engineering brilliance in the battle to build the better Joint Strike Fighter. Evan Hadingham http://www.airspacemag.com/military-aviation/winner-take-all-3486459/?all - “...STOVL version of JSF had to be stealthy, supersonic, and able to bring back a 5,000-pound payload at the end of a mission...... the 1,350-degree heat of the Boeing airplane’s exhaust gases would pose a threat to the surface of carrier decks, if not to the life and limb of Navy crews (the downdraft from Lockheed’s lift fan was some 1,000 degrees cooler). [350] Since Lockheed’s fan boosted engine thrust, its powerplant could run at lower temperature and with less strain, and these diferences would translate into longer life. Most signifcant, assuming its reliability could be ensured, the lift fan would ofer an extra margin of power and safety in a hover. In the end, that ensured Lockheed’s victory....” Boeing and Lockheed Martin’s epic duel began in two of Air Force Plant 42’s giant hangars, separated (YDQ+DGLQJKDP$,5 63$&(0$*$=,1(_-$18$5< :LQQHU7DNH$OO by less than a mile of runway and Death Valley desert scrub in Palmdale, California. In one building, $OOWKHQDLOELWLQJVHFRQGJXHVVLQJDQGVKHHUHQJLQHHULQJ the home of the Skunk Works, was Lockheed Martin’s team. Across the runway was a former Rockwell EULOOLDQFHLQWKHEDWWOHWREXLOGWKHEHWWHU-RLQW6WULNH)LJKWHU IDFLOLW\WDNHQRYHUE\%RHLQJDQG¿OOHGZLWKWRSGUDZHUHQJLQHHULQJWDOHQWVRPHRILWIUHVKIURP McDonnell Douglas after Boeing’s merger with the aerospace giant in 1997. The only visitors allowed http://www.airspacemag.com/military- LQVLGHERWKIDFLOLWLHVZHUH-6)SURJUDPRɤFHUVDQGDFUHZIURPWKH3XEOLF%URDGFDVWLQJ6\VWHP¶V 129$VHULHV 7KLVZDVWKH¿UVWWLPH79DFFHVVKDGHYHUEHHQJUDQWHGWRDFODVVL¿HGPLOLWDU\ aviation/winner-take-all-3486459/?all development program. The NOVA documentary about the triumphs and heartbreaks of the JSF competition, on which this article is based, will air on January 14, 2003.) ACH MORNING DURING THE SUMMER OF 2000, THE STILLNESS OF THE EVERGLADES was shattered by the thunder of an experimental propulsion system 7KHODVWDWWHPSWDWEXLOGLQJRQH¿JKWHUIRUERWKWKH1DY\DQGWKH$LU)RUFHZDVLQWKHHDUO\ V mounted 25 feet up on a test stand at a Pratt & Whitney facility in West Palm Beach, when General Dynamics produced the F-111. After almost a decade of snarling, the Navy backed out of Florida. As the alligators stirred in the swamp, the engine roared away, hour after hour, WKHGHDODQGWKH$LU)RUFHHQGHGXSZLWKRQHRILWVPRVWFRQWURYHUVLDO¿JKWHUV1RZ%RHLQJDQG week after week, while Lockheed Martin engineers watched nervously for signs of trouble in ( Lockheed faced the same danger: In trying to satisfy all three services, they could end up pleasing no WKHLULQWULFDWHFODVVL¿HGGHVLJQ$OOWRRIUHTXHQWO\WKH\ZRXOGVKXWWKHXQLWGRZQDVRQH one. PHFKDQLFDOSUREOHPDIWHUDQRWKHUGRJJHGWKHLUHɣRUWV First there were oil leaks. Then, a quarter-inch misalignment of two gears produced tiny metal The Air Force demanded an agile and stealthy strike aircraft that would enable it to retire its F-16s. The shavings, which worked their way into the gearbox. Bearings failed and a nut wobbled loose. In most Navy needed a replacement for its F-14s and F/A-18s sturdy enough to operate from a carrier deck. The test programs, such failures would rank as little more than minor annoyances that ingenuity and 0DULQH&RUSVZDVZUHVWOLQJZLWKWKHVKRUWFRPLQJVRIWKHVKRUWWDNHRɣDQGYHUWLFDOODQGLQJ$9% patience would surely overcome. But the continual glitches only added to the highstakes gamble that Harrier. The Marines stipulated that, unlike the Harrier, their STOVL version of JSF had to be stealthy, Lockheed was already taking with its revolutionary new propulsion system: a massive lift fan weighing supersonic, and able to bring back a 5,000-pound payload at the end of a mission. “When I took an 1.5 tons. This was the company’s daring solution to one of aviation’s most daunting challenges: getting initial look at the requirements,” recalls Boeing’s chief designer, Dennis Muilenberg, “it worried me. It DVXSHUVRQLF¿[HGZLQJDLUSODQHWRWDNHRɣDQGODQGYHUWLFDOO\ ZDVE\IDUWKHPRVWGLɤFXOWVHWRIUHTXLUHPHQWV,¶YHHYHUVHHQ,WQHHGVWRGRHYHU\WKLQJWKDW And in early 2000, the clock was ticking for the Lockheed team. At stake was a contract, worth at least FRQYHQWLRQDODLUFUDIWGR,WQHHGVWRÀ\YHUWLFDOO\FDUU\LQWHUQDOZHDSRQV LWDOVRKDVWREHORZ ELOOLRQWREXLOGWKH-RLQW6WULNH)LJKWHUDRQHVL]H¿WVDOODWWDFN¿JKWHUIRUWKH$LU)RUFH1DY\ signature; and, oh, by the way, it has to be very low cost and be much more supportable than previous DQG0DULQH&RUSV-6)SURJUDPRɤFHUVKDGDOUHDG\OHW/RFNKHHGPDQDJHUVNQRZWKDWWKHLUFKDQFHVRI aircraft. So yeah, I was worried.” winning against Boeing, their rival in the competition, depended on the success of the lift fan. And Lockheed’s engineers were well aware that for all the brilliance of the lift fan concept, its mechanical To overcome their greatest worry—STOVL capability—Muilenberg and his team chose the simplest, complexity would be its Achilles’ heel. cheapest solution that had already been tested by an operational aircraft: the direct lift approach, pioneered by the British Aerospace Harrier. A direct lift system redirects the thrust from the engine In August 2000, propulsion and controls engineer Scott Winship received an ominous summons from WKURXJKDVHULHVRIGRZQZDUGSRLQWLQJQR]]OHVRQWDNHRɣDQGODQGLQJ0XLOHQEHUJ¶VGHVLJQLQYROYHG /RFNKHHG0DUWLQ¶VSUHVLGHQW'DLQ+DQFRFN³'DLQGUDJJHGXVDOOLQWRKLVRɤFH´:LQVKLSUHPHPEHUV channeling most of the thrust through two main lift nozzles close to the center of gravity, while ³EHFDXVHKHNQHZWKDWLIZHFRXOGQ¶W¿QLVKRXUWHVWLQJRQWLPHWKHFXVWRPHUZDVJRLQJWRSXOOXVIURP DGGLWLRQDOQR]]OHVDWWKHZLQJWLSVDQGWDLOZRXOGKHOSFRQWUROWKHDLUSODQH¶VDWWLWXGH'LJLWDOÀLJKW WKHSURJUDP$OOZH¶GKDYHWRVKRZIRULWZRXOGEHWKLVQHDWVLPXODWLRQDQGZH¶GQHYHUJHWWRÀ\,¶OO controls would manage the job of coordinating the hover control, eliminating the tricky handling that QHYHUIRUJHWKHVDLGµ,ZDQWWRORRNHYHU\ERG\VWUDLJKWLQWKHH\HDQGDVNLI\RX¶UHJRLQJWR¿QLVKWKLV had made the Harrier such a nightmare for neophyte pilots. SURJUDP¶0\¿UVWWKRXJKWZDVWell, maybe this is my last day at Lockheed. At the end of the meeting he handed us the scepter and said, ‘I want you to go do this!’ ” For Winship and his team, it was a make- But other drawbacks of the Harrier approach were not so easy to overcome. The total reliance on the or-break moment. “Thinking back, I bet half the people in the room didn’t believe we could make it. HQJLQHIRUOLIWLQWDNHRɣDQGODQGLQJPHDQWWKDWZHLJKWZDVDOZD\VDFUXFLDOIDFWRU³%RHLQJZDVWKH¿UVW And the rest, like me, who were sticking their necks out, thought Yeah, I think we can.” to get the cost message,” says Flight International reporter Graham Warwick, “and the simplicity of gamble. But the lower skin had a more complex shape, and patches of the material ended up sticking to direct lift gave them a great rationale. But like the Harrier, their plane’s STOVL performance always the mold. One of the advantages of working with thermoplastic is that it can be “re-cooked” if defects depended on the engine. They were always asking for more thrust from the engine than Lockheed, and show up in the manufacturing. Bible’s team added more release agent—similar to cooking spray—to the DOZD\V¿JKWLQJZHLJKWIURPGD\RQH7KRXJKHYHU\DLUFUDIWWHVWSURJUDP¿JKWVZHLJKWIRU%RHLQJLW mold and tried again. This time the skin didn’t stick but the pressure hoses leaked, and out came the became their most critical factor.” bubble-ridden mess that had distressed Bible. /RFNKHHG¶VVROXWLRQWR6729/ZDVWKHOLIWIDQDJURXQGEUHDNLQJGHVLJQWKDWEURXJKWZLWKLWGLɣHUHQW %LEOHODXQFKHGDGHVSHUDWHHɣRUWWRPDNHWKHDGYDQFHGUHVLQSD\Rɣ ,IKHFRRNHGWKHZLQJ\HWDJDLQ NLQGVRIKHDGDFKHV7KHFRQFHSWGDWHVWR ZKHQRɤFLDOVIURPWKH86JRYHUQPHQW¶V'HIHQVH perhaps the bubbles would disappear. For 30 hours the team members held their breath. Gingerly, they Advanced Research Projects Agency asked Skunk Works engineer Paul Bevilaqua to come up with a peeled away the orange pressure bags—and Bible’s face fell. Patches were still sticking to the mold, and way to improve the Harrier’s performance. In his subsequent patent, Bevilaqua sketched out his idea: there were wrinkles where the resin had been compressed unevenly. Now Bible felt as if the weight of installing a pair of horizontal, counter-rotating fans that would provide a pillar of air for the airplane to the whole JSF program was on his back. “If we don’t have a wing skin, we don’t have an airplane,” he hover and land on, in addition to the vectored thrust from the engine. But what would drive this extra VDLG³:HGRQ¶WPDNH¿UVWÀLJKW²LW¶VSUHWW\PXFKµJDPHRYHU¶´ VRXUFHRIOLIW"%HYLODTXDKDGD³(XUHND´PRPHQWZKHQKH¿JXUHGRXWDQHɤFLHQWZD\WRH[WUDFW additional power from the engine. This power was transferred to the lift fan by a drive shaft that As the wing-skin crew struggled, Boeing’s main design team wrestled with its own crisis. The Navy had projected from the front of the engine. The drive shaft had to make a 90-degree turn to the horizontal come back with new demands for performance and weapons-carrying capability. Flight simulators fan via a clutch and gearbox similar, in principle, to those of an automobile. revealed that, with the extra weight on its delta wing, Boeing’s airplane could no longer meet the Navy’s GHPDQGV)RUPRQWKVWKHHQJLQHHUVZRUNHGRQYDULRXV¿[HV6RPHVSDUNHGSURWUDFWHGGHEDWHQRWDEO\ Bevilaqua’s back-of-the-envelope calculations suggested that the drive shaft could supply a phenomenal DGHVLJQIRUDQRYHOWDLOFRQ¿JXUDWLRQDGYDQFHGE\DIRUPHU0F'RQQHOO'RXJODVHQJLQHHU5DOSK 28,000 horsepower, enough to make the lift fan support nearly half the hovering weight of the airplane. 3HOLNDQ$QRUPDOIRXUSRVW¿JKWHUWDLOOD\RXWIHDWXUHVDWZLQSDLURIWDLOVXUIDFHV7KH3HOLNDQWDLO “Several of my colleagues sat up and said ‘Holy smoke!’ ” chief engineer Rick Rezabeck recalls, “ ‘You’re would replace this conventional layout with a striking two-post layout in which just two angled tail JRLQJWRKDYHVKDIWKRUVHSRZHUUXQQLQJWKURXJKWKHPLGGOHRID¿JKWHUMHW¶7KDW¶VDERXWKDOI surfaces controlled both pitch and yaw. the level that the Navy puts through the shaft of a destroyer. So the whole question was: Would it hold itself together and could we make it mechanically and structurally sound enough so it was reliable and In October 1998, top Boeing designers weighed the advantages and penalties of Pelikan’s design. One DGGHGXSWRDYLDEOHMHW¿JKWHU"´ DUJXHGWKDWLWRɣHUHGJUHDWHUSLWFKFRQWURODWKLJKDQJOHVRIDWWDFN7KHQWKHVWHDOWKH[SHUWVSRLQWHGRXW WKDWWZRWDLOVZRXOGKDYHDORZHUUDGDUVLJQDWXUHWKDQIRXU³:HFDQ¶WDɣRUGWRKDYHDQ\TXHVWLRQDWDOO “We’re dead in the water!” For nearly a year, Boeing engineer George Bible had been experimenting over our signature,” argued Fred May. “I vote for the Pelikan tail.” with a novel composite material for the delta wing of the JSF, a project that grew out of a series of %RHLQJGHFLVLRQVWRPDNHVWXUG\DQGFRVWHɤFLHQWFRPSRQHQWVIRULWVQHZ¿JKWHU But another engineer came up with a surprising objection: Despite the fact that the Pelikan tail would eliminate the need for two control surfaces, it might actually end up heavier. The bigger hydraulic The concept was a winner: Build the wing as a rugged, one-piece metal structure, sandwiched by two pumps and cylinders needed to operate the larger surfaces would end up adding at least 200 pounds to layers of composite—an upper skin and a lower skin. To make the skins more durable, Boeing would the design. Meanwhile, team leader Dennis Muilenberg was worried about customer perception. He HPEHGFDUERQ¿EHUVLQDQDGYDQFHGWKHUPRSODVWLFUHVLQ%XWQRRQHKDGWULHGWREXLOGDZLQJVNLQ EHOLHYHGWKDWWKH-6)RɤFHYLHZHG/RFNKHHG¶VFRQYHQWLRQDOIRXUSRVWWDLODVDORZULVNDSSURDFK6KRXOG feet across from a single piece of thermoplastic. Now, as Bible stared at his ultrasound monitor, it was Boeing also go with a tried-and-true design? “On the other hand,” he added, “if we end up looking like clear that the skin was riddled with bubbles. we’re the followers and Lockheed’s the leader, it might be a strategically bad thing.” The experiment had begun encouragingly enough. Bible’s team had spent weeks laying down sheets of Eventually it fell to Muilenberg to break the stalemate. Despite earlier doubts, he concluded, “We need FDUERQ¿EHULQWRUHVLQXQWLOWKHZLQJVNLQZDV VKHHWVGHHSEXWVWLOOOHVVWKDQDQLQFKWKLFN,WZDV WRGRVRPHWKLQJWRRXUFRQ¿JXUDWLRQWKDWZLOOJLYHXVDQDGYDQWDJH,WKLQNWKH3HOLNDQWDLOGRHVWKDW WKHQFXUHGLQDPDVVLYHRYHQOLNHDXWRFODYHXQGHUKLJKSUHVVXUHZKLFKIRUFHGWKH¿EHUVWREOHQGZLWK We’re going to have to work the hell out of weight, but I can’t imagine anyone better at doing that than WKHUHVLQ(PHUJLQJIURPWKHRYHQWKHTXDOLW\RIWKH¿UVWXSSHUVNLQVHHPHGWRERGHZHOOIRU%RHLQJ¶V the Boeing team.” incredible: He was just gone. I had to use full afterburner, and only caught up with him at 10,000 feet.” But days later, Muilenberg’s team reversed its decision. Fresh analysis suggested that the weight Although the X-32A sprang a hydraulic leak and was ordered back to Palmdale, the test program was penalty of the Pelikan tail might be more like 800 or 900 pounds, and this and other factors tipped the RɣWRDQDXVSLFLRXVVWDUW balance in favor of a conventional four-post tail. $PRQWKODWHU/RFNKHHGFDXJKWXSDVLWVGHPRQVWUDWRUWKH;$JRWRɣWKHJURXQG%XWWKHPRVW Back in Seattle, another key decision put an end to George Bible’s agony. After the third thermoplastic FUXFLDOÀLJKWWULDOFRQIURQWHG/RFNKHHGWKHIROORZLQJVXPPHU(DUO\RQ6XQGD\-XQH-6) failure, he was told to abandon what Boeing had hoped would be a competitive edge over Lockheed, program manager Rick Baker nervously joined the lift fan’s godfather, Paul Bevilaqua, and its two key and revert to more conventional—thermoset—material. His exhausted crew cooked up the required problem-solvers, Winship and Rezabeck, at the edge of the Palmdale runway. Former Harrier pilot wing skins without a hitch. “It’s just a good feeling being done with them,” Bible said as he watched Simon Hargreaves, a British test pilot, was about to nurse the X-35B STOVL version and its lift fan into them being loaded on to a C-5 Galaxy. “They were quite a pain.” The Galaxy roared into the sky over WKHDLUIRUWKH¿UVWWLPH Seattle and delivered the wing skins, more or less on time and on budget, to the Boeing assembly line at Palmdale. ³$WWKHWLPHZHZHUHMXVWVXSSRVHGWREHGRLQJµSUHVVXSV¶ZKHUH6LPRQZDVJRLQJXSWRRQO\¿YH IHHW´VD\V%DNHU³$QGKHGLG¿YHIHHW²ZHZDWFKHGWKHZKHHOVFRPHRɣWKHJURXQGDQGP\KHDUW :KLOH%LEOHZDVVWUXJJOLQJZLWKKLVXQUXO\UHVLQV/RFNKHHGIDFHGLWVXOWLPDWHWULDOE\¿UH,QHDUO\ started beating faster. Then he went up 10 feet and came down again so we could measure things like WKH¿UVWRI¿YHWHVWOLIWIDQVZDVKRLVWHGRQWRWKHJLDQW3UDWW :KLWQH\WHVWULJRYHUORRNLQJWKH fuel temperature and heat. And then he went up and up to 50 feet and he held it. We looked at each Florida swamps. As the engine roared day and night, test data was e-mailed daily back to Palmdale, other and said, ‘The Skunks did it again!’ and we hugged everybody. That was the real turning point. ZKHUHWKHHQJLQHHUVZRXOGFRPSDUHUHVXOWVZLWKWKHSUHGLFWLRQVRIWKHLUÀLJKWFRQWUROVLPXODWRUV We knew the magic of the Skunk Works was still there.” Although the constant mechanical glitches that plagued the tests were highly visible to the media, they The lift fan’s success dashed Boeing’s hopes of an easy JSF victory. Yet the very same day at the testing were never the real threat, according to engineer Scott Winship. “I always had faith we could solve EDVHDW1DYDO$LU6WDWLRQ3DWX[HQW5LYHULQ0DU\ODQG%RHLQJ¶V;$FRPSOHWHGLWV¿UVWKRYHU$V those kinds of problems,” he says. “What I didn’t know was whether we would succeed in integrating ÀLJKWWHVWLQJFRQWLQXHGZLWK%RHLQJVRPHWLPHVÀ\LQJ¿YHPLVVLRQVDGD\DQGSHUIRUPLQJQHDUO\ WKHÀLJKWFRQWUROVZHQHHGHGWRPDNHWKLVKXJH¿UHEUHDWKLQJEHDVWEHKDYH$QGZKLOHZHZHUHKDYLQJ ÀDZOHVVO\WKHFRPSHWLWLRQUHPDLQHGWRRFORVHWRFDOO2QO\DPDMRUVOLSZRXOGPDNHRQHWHDPWKH DOOWKHVHPHFKDQLFDOSUREOHPVWKHÀLJKWFRQWUROVWHVWLQJNHSWJHWWLQJGHOD\HGDQGZHKDGVWLOOQRWGRQH obvious winner. WKHKXQGUHGVRIKRXUVRIWHVWVZHQHHGHGWRZULWHWKHFRGHWKDWPDNHVWKHDLUSODQHÀ\7KHSURJUDP was squeezed—we just couldn’t get enough data for our answers. So the whole schedule started At 1,500 feet over Patuxent River, Dennis O’Donoghue turned the X-32B downwind to prepare for its slipping.” ¿UVWYHUWLFDOODQGLQJ$VKHEURXJKW%RHLQJ¶V6729/GHPRQVWUDWRUGRZQWRDVWDEOHKRYHUDWDURXQG IHHWKHÀLFNHGDVZLWFKWKDWWXUQHGRQWKHMHWVFUHHQ²DQDUURZVORWXQGHUWKHIXVHODJHWKDWEOHZ "Home sweet home!" exclaimed Boeing chief test pilot Fred Knox as he clambered into the cockpit. It cool engine bleed air toward the ground, helping to balance the airplane in hover and prevent the ZDVVKRUWO\EHIRUHDPRQ6HSWHPEHUDQGRQWKHUXQZD\DW3DOPGDOH%RHLQJ¶V¿UVW engine from sucking in its own exhaust. GHPRQVWUDWRUWKH;$ZDVRQWKHEULQNRILWVPDLGHQÀLJKW7KLVPRUQLQJ.QR[¶VPLVVLRQZDVWRÀ\ the X-32A, with landing gear down, to Edwards Air Force Base, half an hour away, where it would %\QRZEULPPLQJZLWKFRQ¿GHQFHLQWKHGHPRQVWUDWRU¶VKDQGOLQJTXDOLWLHV2¶'RQRJKXHEURXJKWWKH XQGHUJRDQRWKHU¿YHPRQWKVRIÀLJKWWULDOV X-32B gently down over the hover pit, a cavity in the runway designed to keep the exhaust from EORZLQJEDFNLQWRWKHHQJLQHDQGPLQLPL]HJURXQGHɣHFW7KHDLUSODQHFRDVWHGGRZQWRIHHWWKHQ .QR[ÀLSSHGDVZLWFKDQGWKHHQJLQHURDUHGWROLIH$WWKHHGJHRIWKHUXQZD\%RHLQJHQJLQHHUV O’Donoghue abruptly felt the bottom drop out underneath him. He jammed the throttle full forward FKHHUHG³9HU\VKRUWO\DIWHUOLIWRɣ´.QR[VDLG³LWZDVDEVROXWHO\FOHDUWRPHWKDW,ZDVÀ\LQJWKH DQGDUHGHQJLQHOLJKWÀLFNHGRQWKHDXWRPDWHGYRLFHKHKDGKRSHGQHYHUWRKHDUEDUNLQJ ³:DUQLQJ airplane we had designed, built, and that I had been simulating for several years.” :DUQLQJ(QJLQH(QJLQH´5HGOLJKWVZHUHÀDVKLQJLQWKHFRQWUROURRPWRRDQGÀLJKWFRQWUROOHU Howard Gofus tensely ordered O’Donoghue to abort the landing. But O’Donoghue was already at full Dennis O’Donoghue, a second JSF test pilot, following behind Knox in an F/A-18, was in shock. “Fred power, and there was nothing more he could do. Bracing himself for a crash, he radioed, “I’m coming ZDVÀ\LQJDWPLOLWDU\SRZHUZLWKQRDIWHUEXUQHU´KHVDLG³%XWKHVWDUWHGFOLPELQJOLNHDURFNHW,WZDV down!” cowl and undercarriage doors removed to increase the thrust-to-weight margin. (“I would have left my Then, with only seconds to spare, he got a reprieve. With around 20 feet to go, the engine recovered and underwear home that day,” says O’Donoghue.) the cockpit warnings ceased. The X-32B slowed its descent until it made a gentle touchdown at almost precisely its targeted landing speed. For the onlookers who rushed forward to congratulate “In my mind, it was physics versus technology,” says Lockheed test pilot Paul Smith. “In the area of O’Donoghue, it appeared to be a normal landing. Only Gofus and his team in the tower knew about the STOVL performance, Boeing just didn’t have the physics behind them—they didn’t have the thrust of FORVHVKDYHDQGWKH\TXLFNO\¿JXUHGRXWZKDWWKHSUREOHPZDV7KHZLQGWKDWQRUPDOO\KHOSHGFOHDU WKHHQJLQHXSDQGWKHZHLJKWRIWKHDLUSODQHGRZQZKLOHZHKDGDWHFKQRORJ\WKDWPDGHHɤFLHQWXVHRI exhaust from the hover pit had momentarily died, and as the X-32B came down, its own exhaust gases engine power, but it was so technologically advanced that it was touch-and-go whether it would work. A had risen up from the walls of the pit and been sucked into the engine. month before we were supposed to demonstrate STOVL, we were still having problems with the lift fan WKDWZHWKRXJKWZHPLJKWQRWEHDEOHWR¿[%RHLQJKDGGRQHVRPDQ\FRROWKLQJVDQGZHUHDKHDGRIXV &RQ¿GHQWLQWKHGLDJQRVLV*RIXVZHQWDKHDGZLWKDVHFRQGODQGLQJRYHUDQRUPDOUXQZD\VXUIDFH on schedule so much. It was like the tortoise and the hare.” O’Donoghue touched down without incident. On October 26, 2001, several hundred members of the Lockheed Martin team gathered in the X-35 One week later, pilot Paul Stone of Britain’s Royal Navy took O’Donoghue’s place for another test: the hangar at Palmdale. On a big-screen TV, the Pentagon announced the company’s victory, causing the ;%¶V¿UVWYHUWLFDOWDNHRɣ7KHÀLJKWSODQFDOOHGIRUDYHUWLFDOODQGLQJIROORZHGLPPHGLDWHO\E\D team to erupt in deafening cheers. “We did as much as we needed to win this thing,” an ecstatic YHUWLFDOWDNHRɣ$V6WRQHEURXJKWWKHDLUSODQHGRZQJHQWO\ZLWKWKHWLUHVDOPRVWWRXFKLQJWKHUXQZD\ 5H]DEHFNWROG129$³:HZHUHYHU\FRPIRUWDEO\²DQ[LRXVO\DQGQHUYRXVO\²FRQ¿GHQW´,QDFRQWHVWLQ LWZREEOHGPRPHQWDULO\WKHQDEULJKWÀDVKDQGDORXGSRSZHQWRɣXQGHUQHDWKWKHIXVHODJH2QFH which both sides had displayed astonishing inventiveness, Lockheed had taken the bigger risk. And if again, hot exhaust had been sucked into the engine, and this time had caused a split-second engine the reliability of Bevilaqua’s lift fan has yet to be proven, it seemed reliable enough to win Lockheed the “pop stall.” biggest military contract of the new century. ³6729/ YHUVLRQ RI -6) KDG WR EH VWHDOWK\ VXSHU 7KHPHGLDZHUHTXLFNWRVHL]HRQWKHHSLVRGHEXW2¶'RQRJKXHZDVXQUXɥHG³$OORIXVZKRZRUNHG with Harriers knew what that pop stall was and it was no big deal,” he says. “In fact, our simulations VRQLF DQG DEOH WR EULQJ EDFN D SRXQG had predicted exactly what happened: If the plane tilted more than four degrees near the ground, the MHWVFUHHQZRXOGQRORQJHUSURWHFWWKHHQJLQHDQGDVWDOOZRXOGOLNHO\IROORZ:HKDGDOUHDG\¿[HGWKH SD\ORDG DW WKH HQG RI D PLVVLRQ SUREOHPLQRXU¿QDOGHVLJQSURSRVDOZLWKDELJJHUMHWVFUHHQ´ WKH GHJUHH KHDW RI WKH %RHLQJ DLUSODQH¶V As far as the Boeing team was concerned, the pop stall had been a nonevent, but the members knew it H[KDXVW JDVHV ZRXOG SRVH D WKUHDW WR WKH VXUIDFH RI hadn’t looked good. Perception is everything, and the episode was a reminder of other inherent FDUULHU GHFNV LI QRW WR WKH OLIH DQG OLPE RI 1DY\ FUHZV drawbacks that direct lift had and Lockheed’s fan didn’t. As with the Harrier, the 1,350-degree heat of the Boeing airplane’s exhaust gases would pose a threat to the surface of carrier decks, if not to the life WKH GRZQGUDIW IURP /RFNKHHG¶V OLIW IDQZDVVRPH and limb of Navy crews (the downdraft from Lockheed’s lift fan was some 1,000 degrees cooler). Since Lockheed’s fan boosted engine thrust, its powerplant could run at lower temperature and with less GHJUHHV FRROHU 6LQFH /RFNKHHG¶V IDQ ERRVWHG VWUDLQDQGWKHVHGLɣHUHQFHVZRXOGWUDQVODWHLQWRORQJHUOLIH0RVWVLJQL¿FDQWDVVXPLQJLWVUHOLDELOLW\ HQJLQH WKUXVW LWV SRZHUSODQW FRXOG UXQ DW ORZHU FRXOGEHHQVXUHGWKHOLIWIDQZRXOGRɣHUDQH[WUDPDUJLQRISRZHUDQGVDIHW\LQDKRYHU,QWKHHQG WHPSHUDWXUH DQG ZLWK OHVV VWUDLQ DQG WKHVH GLIHUHQFHV that ensured Lockheed’s victory. ZRXOG WUDQVODWH LQWR ORQJHU OLIH 0RVW VLJQLIFDQW 7KHUHFRUGRIWKHÀLJKWWHVWVRɣHUVDQLPSRUWDQWFOXHWRZK\/RFNKHHGZRQ$WWKHSURJUDP¶V DVVXPLQJ LWV UHOLDELOLW\ FRXOG EH HQVXUHG WKH OLIW IDQ FRQFOXVLRQWKH;%KDGSHUIRUPHG6729/ÀLJKWVPRVWDW(GZDUGV$LU)RUFH%DVHDWDQDOWLWXGH RIIHHW,QFRQWUDVW%RHLQJ¶V;%KDGÀRZQ6729/ÀLJKWVEXWWKHVHZHUHDOODWWKHVHDOHYHO ZRXOG RIHU DQ H[WUD PDUJLQ RI SRZHU DQG VDIHW\ LQ D 3DWX[HQW5LYHU1DYDO$LU6WDWLRQ'HVSLWHWKHDOWLWXGHDGYDQWDJHWKH%RHLQJDLUSODQHÀHZZLWKLWVLQOHW KRYHU ,Q WKH HQG WKDW HQVXUHG /RFNKHHG¶V YLFWRU\´ PROVEN TECHNOLOGY - F135 JSF ENGINE CHARACTERISTICS CONVENTIONAL TAKE OFF AND LANDING SHORT TAKE OFF AND VERTICAL LANDING CTOL / CV ENGINE DESIGN STOVL PROPULSION SYSTEM DESIGN Maximum Thrust (in pounds): 43,000 (191.3 kN) Maximum Thrust (in pounds): 43,000 (191.3 kN) Intermediate Thrust (in pounds): 28,000 (128.1 kN) Short Takeoff Thrust: 38,100 (169.5 kN) Length: 220 inches (5.59 meters) Hover Thrust 39,400 (175.3 kN) Main Engine: 15,700 Lift Fan: 20,000 Inlet Diameter: 46 inches (1.17 meters) Roll Post: 3,700 Maximum Diameter: 51 inches (1.30 meters) Length: 369 inches (9.37 meters) Bypass Ratio: 0.57 Inlet Diameter 46 inches (1.17 meters) Main Engine: 50 inches (1.27 meters) Lift Fan: Overall Pressure Ratio: 28 Maximum Diameter: 51 inches (1.30 meters) Bypass Ratio 0.56 Conventional: 0.51 CONVENTIONAL TAKE OFF AND LANDING CTOL / Powered Lift: CV ENGINE DESIGN Maximum Thrust (in pounds): 43,000 (191.3 kN) Intermediate Thrust (in pounds): 28,000 (128.1 kN) & Overall Pressure Ratio 28 SHORT TAKE OFF AND VERTICAL LANDING STOVL PROPULSION SYSTEM DESIGN Conventional: 29 Maximum Thrust (in pounds): 43,000 (191.3 kN) Powered Lift: Short Takeoff Thrust: 38,100 (169.5 kN) Hover Thrust 39,400 (175.3 kN) http://www.f135engine.com/pro Main Engine: 15,700 Lift Fan: 20,000 Roll Post: 3,700 TOTAL: 39,400 ven-tech/engine_chacter.shtml https://www.flickr.com/photos/rolls-royceplc/14568504651/in/set-72157645453500836/ Pentagon to build new variable-cycle engine for F-35 and other aircraft Marina Malenic 17 Mar 2015 Key Points: • The Pentagon's new sixth-generation engine will be built for the F-35 and several other aircraft • The new engine would be 35% more fuel efficient than existing engines, extending the range of US aircraft significantly The Pentagon's developmental sixth-generation jet engine featuring greater fuel efficiency and thrust than existing military engines is initially being built for the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter (JSF), a senior agency official said on 17 March. "There are a number of threshold platforms," Alan Shaffer, the principal deputy assistant secretary of defense, research, and engineering, told IHS Jane's at the Precision Strike Association's annual conference in Springfield, Virginia.... http://www.janes.com/article/50010/pentagon-to-build-new-variable-cycle-engine-for-f-35-and-other-aircraft Screech, the F135 and to overcome the problem, he Building on its experience the JSF Engine War said. ZLWKWKH) WKH¿[IRUWKH So what is screech and F135 includes “minor hardware 17 Mar 2011 Graham Warwick ZKDW¶VWKH¿[" changes to the fuel system, For those of us who thought Pratt says screech is a reduced aerodynamic leakages screech was the noise made by phenomenon caused by and upgraded software,” says GE/Rolls and Pratt & Whitney pressure pulsations in the 3UDWWDGGLQJWKDWWKHPRGL¿HG in their war of words over the afterburner at low altitude and engine “now provides full max JSF second engine, here’s high speed. The problem was augmented thrust throughout the background to comments discovered during development WKHÀLJKWHQYHORSH´ made this week about screech testing around March 2009, A kit has been developed problems with the F-35’s F135 having previously been IRUÀLJKWWHVWHQJLQHVDQG engine. encountered - and solved - in WZRKDYHEHHQPRGL¿HG7KH Testifying before the House the F-22’s F119 engine, from SURGXFWLRQFRQ¿JXUDWLRQZLOOEH Armed Services Committee which the F135 is derived. validated this year in both the on Tuesday, JSF program Pratt points out that CTOL/CV and STOVL variants of H[HFXWLYHRϒFHU$GP'DYLG the F119 and F135 are the the F135, Pratt says. Venlet said afterburner screech only production engines I have asked GE/Rolls on the F135, which prevents with stealthy augmentors. whether their F136 has the engine from sustaining full Their design eliminates a screech-free stealthy thrust, “caused us to avoid conventional spray bars augmentor. Watch this space FHUWDLQSRUWLRQVRIWKHÀLJKW DQGÀDPHKROGHUVDQG for their answer. envelope.” Instead, F-35s have integrates multi-zone http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/ reheat fuel injection into defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckScript ÀRZQWRRWKHUSRLQWVLQWKH =blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPa HQYHORSHWRNHHSÀLJKWWHVW curved vanes that block the ge=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53- line-of-sight to the turbine. dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3a261f21c4- going. Kits are being installed 19ea-40e0-a756-ed0491972939 PARLIAMENTARY JOINT COMMITTEE set of ground rules associated with how Senator FAWCETT: No, I recognise ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS, DEFENCE AND that range is calculated which is not that. You have rebaselined schedule TRADE 20 MARCH 2012 similar to either of the other two air- and cost as you have gone along. What “...Senator FAWCETT: I have one SODQHV7KHDLUSODQHÀLHVDODUJHSDUW I am asking is have the KPIs been re- last question, if I can. Speaking of the of its mission at a non-optimised al- baselined & does the statement you key performance indicators, obvious- titude in the original calculation. The just made apply to today’s KPIs or does ly for the overall program they are cost, JROC agreed to change the ground it also apply to the original ones? schedule and performance. In cost and UXOHVWRÀ\WKDWDLUSODQHDVWKHRWKHU Mr Burbage: To the original set. Today, schedule we have seen a number of WZRZHUHÀRZQDQGZKHQWKDWKDS- all the KPPs are green because that changes and rebaselining to allow for pened, the airplane had excess margin ground rule was changed to be com- things that have happened. In terms to the range requirement. For any per- mon across all three airplanes on the of the KPIs against your original ops formance-related requirements, we ar- range. But we have not taken back requirement document — you do not WL¿FLDOO\SHQDOLVHWKHHQJLQHE\¿YHSHU the margins that are being with- have to disclose which ones have not FHQWIXHOÀRZDQGWZRSHUFHQWWKUXVW held to make sure those perfor- been met — but at this point in time Those margins are given back as we mance predictions are conser- have all of the original essential re- mature the design and get more and vative. We are not going to have quirements from the ORD been met? more solid on exactly what it is going degraded engines. We basical- Mr Burbage: We have 16 key per- to do. They are there for conservative ly measure our performance char- formance parameters on this airplane. estimation up front. We have not taken acteristics with a highly-degraded Half are logistics and sustainment-re- back any of those margins yet so, when HQJLQHFDSDELOLW\2XUDFWXDOÀLJKW lated, half are aeroperformance-related those margins are taken back, the air- test information coming back from DQGRQHRUWZRDUHLQFODVVL¿HGDUHDV plane will continue to be well in excess the engine is better than nominal. We have an oversight body called the of its basic requirement. The airplane is These calculations are not done Joint Requirements Oversight Coun- meeting all of the other requirements using actual airplane test data. cil, the JROC, that looks at those re- today. 7KH\DUHGRQHXVLQJDQDUWL¿FLDO quirements every year and makes deci- Senator FAWCETT: So have those re- penalty that gets paid back as the sions on them — ‘Are we going to meet quirements like schedule & cost been design matures....” them, are we not going to meet them? rebaselined, or are they are still the http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Commit- If we are not going to meet them, what original ORD? tees/House_of_Representatives_Committees?url=/jfadt/ defenceannualreport_2010_2011/hearings.htm is the impact of that?’ We have one Mr Burbage: Schedule and cost are this year which was the range of the not KPPs. I thought you were talking http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display. $LU)RUFHDLUSODQHZKLFKKDGDVSHFL¿F w3p;query=Id%3A%22committees%2Fcommjnt%2F3cb about performance. 4e326-70e4-4abd-acb7-609a16072b70%2F0001%22 “Lockheed Martin test pilot David Nelson performs a short take- http://www.codeonemagazine.com/images/media/2011_F35B_BF1_P00140_28_1267828237_3717.jpg off on the 111th flight of F-35B BF-1 on 4 April 2011. Photo by Andy Wolfe” Lockheed Martin rebuts F-35 critics on cost, progress By: Chris Pocock July 19, 2010 15 March 2011: 100th Short F-35B Sets STOVL Milestones Takeoff http://www.codeonemagazinecom/ “When asked how the F-35B compared to the Harrier in terms images/media/2011_01_100th_STO_ 11P00140_28_1267828237_6628.JPG of ease of takeoff/landing, Tomlinson replied: ‘LowObservable’ said: “It’s chalk and cheese–and so it should be! 24 July 2011 (re F-35B STO) Future Carrier (Incl Costs) Thread: This is a single-button operation with no special controls– http://www.pprune.org/military-aircrew/221 116-future-carrier-including-costs-152.html - much easier than the Harrier. For short takeoffs you just “1 - STO starts with the core power up; the system takes care of everything else. On the nozzle almost straight aft, with a little nose-down pitching ski-jump, for instance, the system detects the change in deck moment to load the nosewheel angle & doesn’t apply any rotation as it would on a flat deck.” and ensure effective steering. http://www.ainonline.com/news/single-news-page/article/ 2 - The pilot applies aft stick and the core nozzle and fan set the lockheed-martin-rebuts-f-35-critics-on-cost-progress-25359/ required nose-up pitch for liftoff. This can also be commanded by pushing a button on the stick, or done automatically after the pilot inputs a deck-roll distance. 3 - As soon as the weight is off the wheels the engine nozzles and aerodynamic surfaces combine to provide conventional handling responses. 4 - As the aircraft accelerates, the aerodynamic surfaces get more effective, the engine effectors become less active and the thrust points aft. Once the jet is above stall speed, the pilot presses the conversion button. The reverse conversion takes about 10 seconds. The clutch re-engages to free the locks, which are pulled out, and the clutch backs away. The core nozzle rolls up and is locked in full-aft position, and when the lift fan has spun down the STOVL doors are SWP: “Interesting that for a STO takeoff they do not have the bay doors open like a they do for a VL.” closed.” Crew: One pilot http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2011/02/11/353066/cost-of-f-35-engine-production-declines-but- Dimensions: Length - 50.5 ft (15.4m); Wingspan - 35.0 ft (10.7m); Tail - 15.0 ft (4.6m) delays-and-upgrades-raise -development.html Weight: Empty - about 23,500 lb (10,660 kg); Maximum Takeoff - about 50,000 lb (22,680 kg) Maximum Payload - 11,000 lb (4,990 kg) Cost of F-35 engine production declines, Combat Radius: Approximately 450 nm but delays & upgrades raise development price Speed: MACH 1.5 at altitude By Stephen Trimble DATE:11/FEB/11 SOURCE:Flight International "...Company officials also confirm a debate exists within the programme over slightly boosting the thrust of the http://media.defenceindustrydaily.com/ Fin F-35B short takeoff and vertical landing (STOVL) variant in order to meet a key performance target.... images/AIR_F-35B_Cutaway_lg.jpg Fuel ...Meanwhile, several performance improvements for the lift-fan system will increase the cost of development Tank by another $400 million, he says. Those upgrades include increasing the temperature and performance margins in the design of the lift fan, clutch and roll-posts actuators, he says. https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/ In addition to those improvements, P&W has offered to boost the overall thrust provided by the STOVL 70/34/de/7034ded64a14e014ce2b3caccfb9cde1.jpg propulsion system by about 400lbf, or roughly 1%, Boley says. Rudder "There are those who debate whether the STOVL has sufficient margin Activator to always come back and land fully loaded," Boley says. 3-Bearing According to Boley, Larry Lawson, Lockheed's executive vice president Swivel leading the F-35 programme, told him last week that the STOVL Nozzle variant currently has enough thrust to meet the Wheel Bay "bring-back" requirement estab- Tailpipe lished by the US Marine Corps. Activator "He said, 'I have sufficient margin. Auxiliary Vent Doors If I need more thrust I will let you know," Boley says." Lift Fan Doors Lift Fan Ejection Seat Diverter Rudder In Lift Pedals Position Radar Roll Nozzle Ducts Pratt & Lift Fan Whitney Drive- Lift F 135 Shaft Fan Split Lower Clutch Duct Forward Engine Weapon Air Lift Fan Fuel Tank Oxygen Radar Leading-Edge Bay Door Intake Door Under Flap Actuators With Valve Forward Mounted Box Tank Specifications of F-35B Missile Nozzle https://s-media-cache- ak0.pinimg.com/ originals/2b/6e/32/2b6 e32ebf35ed884d1264a 02efd7a583.jpg http://sstc-online.org/2003/PDFFiles/Huff.pdf F-35B 2005 Weight Reduction/Thrust Improvement Conventional Take Off and Landing Short Take Off and Vertical Landing CTOL/CV Engine Design WEIGHS 5,400lbs? STOVL Propulsion System Design Maximum Thrust 43,000 lbs (191.3 kN) Maximum Thrust Class 41,000 lbs (182.4 kN) Intermediate Thrust 28,000 lbs (128.1 kN) Intermediate Thrust Class 27,000 lbs (120.1 kN) Length 220 in (5.59 m) Short Take Off Thrust Class 40,740 lbs (181.2 kN) http:// Inlet Diameter 43 in (1.09 m) Hover Thrust 40,650 hover thrust 40,650 lbs (180.8 kN) www.pw.utc. 32,300 weight empty Maximum Diameter 46 in (1.17 m) com/Content/ Main Engine PLUS 18,680 lbs (83.1 kN) F135_Engine/ 3,000 weapons Bypass Ratio 0.57 Lift Fan bringback 18,680 lbs (83.1 kN) pdf/B-2-4_F135_ 4,350 lbs of fuel Overall Pressure Ratio 28 SpecsChart.pdf Roll Post MINUS 3,290 lbs (14.6 kN) Any Error margins Length 1K hover thrust margin? 369 in (9.37 m) F135 Specs Charts Main Engine Inlet Diameter 43 in (1.09 m) Updated September 2012 Main Engine Maximum Diameter 46 in (1.17 m) “The F135 engine weighs 3,750 Lift Fan Inlet Diameter 51 in (1.30 m) pounds and is 18.3 feet long” Lift Fan Maximum Diameter 53 in (1.34 m) http://www.tinker.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123310707 Conventional Bypass Ratio 0.56 Powered Lift Bypass Ratio 0.51 Conventional Overall Pressure Ratio 28 Powered Lift Overall Pressure Ratio 29 Three Bearing Swivel Duct Vector Capability: Pitch Angle: Axial to 95 degrees YAW Angle: +/- 13 degrees Lift Fan Vectoring: -5 degrees Fwd & -42 degrees Aft http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ABF2yIXwytY/ UxokVj09d3I/AAAAAAAAEjM/8IlCoQ40zBg/ s1600/PW-engine-changeTimes.jpg http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ABF2yIXwytY/UxokVj09d3I/AAAAAAAAEjM/8IlCoQ40zBg/s1600/PW-engine-changeTimes.jpg http:// www.f-16.net/ forum/ download/ file.php? id=10587 &mode=view CLICK! 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 60 KIAS SRVL adds 2,000 lbs VLBB - - - Total 3,500 lbs weapons 7,000lbs? 1,500 lbs fuel = 5,000 lbs approx. http://www.aviation week.com/media/ pdf/JSF_Program _Update.pdf “Then we used a variety of brain- a jet engine is already transferring around Joint Strike Fighter storming and creativity exercises to 75,000 horsepower.” come up with a new concept,” Bevilaqua A lift fan concept involves two STOVL- PERSPECTIVES continues. “ The technique that worked related problems at once. “The lift fan Code One Magazine July 1996 Vol. 11 No. 3 broke the problem down into its funda- V\VWHPHϒFLHQWO\WUDQVIHUVWKUXVWIURP Paul Bevilaqua Lift-Fan System Inventor PHQWDOHOHPHQWV6LQFHPRGHUQ¿JKW- the back of the airplane to the front,” Paul Bevilaqua could claim that he has ers have a thrust-to-weight ratio greater Bevilaqua explains. “At the same time, it been working on the Marine and Royal than one, the basic problem is to get half increases the total thrust of the engine Navy variant of the Joint Strike Fighter of the thrust from the back of the air- because it increases the bypass ratio from since 1985, when he began researching plane to the front. The simplest solution DUHODWLYHO\ORZRQHDVVRFLDWHGZLWK¿JKWHU VKRUWWDNHRϑDQGYHUWLFDOODQGLQJWHFK- is to duct it there, but ducting makes the HQJLQHVWRDKLJKRQHIRUYHUWLFDOÀLJKW,Q nologies on a NASA project at the Skunk airplane too wide to go supersonic. So other words, it makes the airplane more Works. His subsequent work led to a pat- we looked for other ways to extract ener- like a helicopter in the vertical mode. ent in 1990 for the lift-fan concept used in gy from the back, transfer it to the front, “The Harrier makes a similar ap- the Lockheed Martin STOVL variant. and produce lift. SURDFK´%HYLODTXDFRQWLQXHV³,WKDVD “The goal of those early studies was a “We generated a lot of wild ideas in- large fan to augment the thrust of a small supersonic STOVL aircraft,” Bevilaqua ex- volving energy beams and superconduc- engine core. But the airplane has to live plains, “but at that point, we were design- tivity,” Bevilaqua says. “but none worked with that fan in the cruise mode. Because ing airplanes, not inventing propulsion out until we looked at a variable-pitch tur- the fan is so large, the airplane can’t go systems. Several companies were con- bine to extract power from the jet ex- supersonic. ducting similar studies. Everyone was re- haust. From that point, everything just “Our lift fan approach is like taking working old concepts or looking at new started falling into place.” that one large fan on the Harrier’s engine, concepts that didn’t provide any real ad- From these ARPA studies, the Skunk breaking it into two smaller fans, and vantage. NASA was disappointed in the Works recommended two STOVL ap- WXUQLQJRϑRQHRIWKHVPDOOHUIDQVZKHQ lack of innovation.” proaches: a gas-driven fan and a shaft- the airplane converts to the cruise mode,” As these studies ended, the Ad- driven fan. ARPA liked both of them. “We he explains. “The concept doesn’t com- vanced Research Projects Agency asked thought the shaft-driven fan was the bet- promise the other JSF variants. Our the Skunk Works if it could come up with ter concept,” Bevilaqua says. “However, STOVL concept requires twin inlets, any new ideas. “We started from the be- the gas-driven fan was perceived as being what we call bifurcated inlet ducts, to ginning,” Bevilaqua recounts. “First, we less risky. Propulsion engineers are famil- create the space needed for the lift fan. looked at all the old ideas that hadn’t iar with ducting gases through an airplane. That is the only design requirement. worked and tried to understand why they But the idea of shafting 25,000 horsepow- And bifurcated ducts have low-observ- hadn’t worked. From that study, we made er was new. People were uncomfortable able and performance advantages that a list of requirements for an ideal super- with the magnitude of the number. But improve all of our JSF variants.” sonic STOVL propulsion system. there’s really little to fear. The shaft inside http://www.codeonemagazine.com/images/C1_V11N3_SM_1271449318_7528.pdf Genesis of the F-35 It would have to be variable- [4], so that it would be neces- pitch, so that it could be feath- sary to close the cruise nozzle Joint Strike Fighter ered during cruise. Another GRZQWRNHHSWKHHQJLQHIURP http://pdf.aiaa.org/getfile.cfm?urlX=- %3CWI’7D%2FQKS%2B%2FRP%23IW%40%20 driveshaft could be run from over speeding. On the other %20%0A&urlb=!*0%20%20%0A&urlc=!*0%20%20 %0A&urld=!*0%20%20%0A%3CWI’7D%2FQKS%2B%2FRP %23IW%40%20%20%0A&urlb=!*0%20%20 the added turbine stage hand, if the lift fan was con- %0A&urlc=!*0%20%20%0A&urld=!*0%20%20%0A through the engine to a lift fan: nected to the turbine at the Paul M. Bevilaqua | Nov-Dec 2009 Rolls-Royce was already build- same time that the bypass air “....It became apparent that the ing three spool engines. The was diverted to the wings, the best way to extract power from lift fan provides one lift post. lift fan would absorb the extra hot high-pressure exhaust gas Vectoring the cruise nozzle WXUELQHSRZHUDQGNHHSWKH is with a turbine, the best way down would create another lift engine from speeding up. Then to get the power forward in an post. Shifting power between varying the nozzle area would aircraft is with a driveshaft (it the lift fan and cruise nozzle VKLIWSRZHUEDFNDQGIRUWKIRU is light and does not increase would provide control in pitch. pitch control. the cross-sectional area of the Similarly, engine bypass air When the lift fan was disen- fuselage), and the best way to could be ducted off to nozzles gaged for cruise, the bypass produce vertical thrust is with in the wings and thrust could ÀRZZRXOGEHUHWXUQHGWRWKH DIDQ LQFUHDVLQJPDVVÀRZLV be shifted from one wing to cruise nozzle. This would match the best way to increase thrust the other to provide roll control. the nozzle area to the cruise per horsepower). But ducting off the bypass power requirement again. In Therefore, the best solution air would effectively increase fact, it would not be necessary to the problem of producing the nozzle exit area for the to add another turbine stage. thrust ahead of the center of FRUHÀRZDQGORZHUWKHEDFN The existing turbine would gravity would be to add anoth- pressure on the turbine sec- move off its design operating er turbine stage to extract tion. That would increase the point to provide shaft power for power from the exhaust gases. power produced by the turbine KRYHUDQGEDFNWRLWVGHVLJQ operating point for cruise. The To summarize, the solution into additional shaft power, it existing driveshaft for the was to extract some of the is necessary to consider the engine fan could just be length- energy from the engine exhaust changes in the static pressure ened to power the lift fan. jet by changing the operating RIWKHDLUDVLWÀRZVWKURXJK Because the lift fan is not point of the turbine, move the engine. The variation of connected to the engine during it forward with a shaft, and total energy (top) and static FUXLVHÀLJKWWKHHQJLQHRSHU- turn it into additional thrust pressure (middle) through an DWHVOLNHDFRQYHQWLRQDOPL[HG by adding it to a larger mass engine are shown in Fig. 4. The ÀRZWXUERIDQHQJLQHGXULQJ ÀRZRIDLUZLWKDIDQ7KHOLIW pressure rises through the cruise. For STOVL operations, fan is attached to a driveshaft compressor (2–3), remains the lift fan is connected to the extending from the front of the constant through the combus- cruise engine by engaging a cruise engine, as shown in Fig. tor (3–4), and then drops clutch on the driveshaft. The 3, and bypass air for the roll through the turbine section cruise engine nozzle is simul- jets is tapped off from behind (4–5) and nozzle (5–6), in two taneously opened, increasing WKHFUXLVHHQJLQHIDQ7KLQNLQJ steps. As the pressure drops the pressure drop across the about howto extract power through the turbine section, engine’s turbine section. This IURPWKHEDFNRIWKHDLUSODQH WKHÀRZDFFHOHUDWHV7KH causes it to extract additional and transfer it to the front resulting thrust of the jets shaft power, which is used to UHVXOWHGLQDÀDVKRILQVLJKWWKDW from the turbine nozzles spins drive the lift fan. The engine produced the dual-cycle-engine WKHWXUELQHGLVNWKDWSRZHUV WKHQRSHUDWHVLQKRYHUOLNHD concept as the solution for the the driveshaft....”>0E3')@ VHSDUDWHÀRZWXUERIDQZLWKD 6729/6WULNH)LJKWHU KWWS SGIDLDDRUJJHW¿OHFIP"XUO; higher bypass ratio. This dual- %3CWI’7D%2FQKS%2B%2FRP%23IW%40%20 %20%0A&urlb=!*0%20%20%0A&urlc=!*0%20 cycle operation is the novel Principle of Operation %20%0A&urld=!*0%20%20%0A%3CWI’7 D%2FQKS%2B%2FRP%23IW%40%20%20 feature of the engine in the To appreciate how this dual- %0A&urlb=!*0%20%20%0A&urlc=!*0%20%20 F-35 [5]. cycle engine turns jet thrust %0A&urld=!*0%20%20%0A From AIAA paper ‘The Genesis of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter’ by Paul Bevilaqua http://elementsofpower.blogspot.com.au/2012/02/f-35-stores-testing-observation.html - ‘QUOTE: This first-order analysis suggested that it might be possible to almost double the thrust of an existing F-119 engine with a dualcycle shaft-driven lift fan the same diameter as the engine. Such a variable- cycle propulsion system would provide high levels of thrust augment- ation in the STOVL mode, with a cool low-pressure footprint, ample con- trol power, and minimal effect on the design of the airframe. By placing the lift fan in line with the cruise engine, the bypass ratio would be in- creased without increasing the engine diameter. And because the cruise engine can be optimized for conventional flight, its performance is not penalized for its STOVL capability. END QUOTE’ “Everyone doesn't have access to AIAA archives, but everyone on the web should know what a frickin' search engine looks like. Bevilaqua also notes in more than one of his AIAA papers that the mid-mission CG of the B model is effectively the same as the A model. This is a critical point be- cause one seeks to design the aircraft to have the best mass properties for maneuvering at mid-mission weights because that is the time when a combat aircraft needs its best maneuverability.” SMSgt Mac http://www.scribd.com/doc/50263160/Popular-Science-April-2007 http://www.rolls- royce.com/Images/ Liftsystem_tcm92- 6697.pdf http://www.rolls-royce.com/defence/products/combat_jets/rr_liftsystem.jsp “Product details The Rolls-Royce LiftSystem® enables short take off and vertical landing (STOVL) operations for the supersonic capable Joint Strike Fighter. • Combined STOVL capability of 40,000 lbf The Rolls-Royce LiftSystem® comprises the Rolls-Royce LiftFan®, Driveshaft, 3 Bearing Swivel Module (3BSM) and Roll Posts. The LiftFan, a 50-inch, two-stage counter-rotating fan capable of gen- erating more than 20,000lbf of thrust, is driven from a conventional gas turbine and produces the forward vertical lift. The 3BSM is a swivelling jet pipe capable of redirecting the main engine thrust downward to provide the rear vertical lift. It can rotate through 95 degrees in 2.5 seconds and passes 18,000lbf of thrust. Aircraft roll control is achieved using the Roll Posts mounted in the wings of the aircraft, which provide a further 1,950lbf of thrust each. Rolls-Royce is managing the overall development and integration programme from its site in Bristol, UK, which is also responsible for the LiftFan turbomachinery, 3BSM and Roll Post designs. The team in Indianapolis, US, will provide the system’s gearbox, clutch, driveshaft and nozzle and will conduct the build and verification testing of the LiftFan.” Liftfan is effectively an engine turned on its end,’ said Neil Mehta, The walk marked the end of the Harriers’ 41-year career and closed an programme director. ’This means the air has to turn through 90° illustrious chapter in British aviation history. The iconic aircraft has before entering into the aircraft, causing huge distortions in airflow.’ become one of the country’s greatest technical achievements, being the only military jet that could hover above the ground and fly in areas Counter-rotating blisks are A normal aircraft engine is usually other fighter aircraft were unable to reach. manufactured using hollow cleared to around a 30-knot cross wind. The F-35B, however, has to blades joined to the disc deal with winds up to 300mph through linear friction (483km/h). ’To put that into context, Hurricane Katrina Despite this capability, the Harrier jets fell victim to the cuts outlined in welding measured at about 75mph at its the government’s strategic defence and security review. The UK has no max, so we’re getting an awful lot Inner workings:schematic shows how the system will be positioned plans to replace the Harrier and many remain concerned for the loss of more distortion,’ he said. To address this, the team has used military capability. But while the UK may be losing the Harrier, it is not computational fluid dynamics to model airflow behaviour and For the blisks, Rolls-Royce is using hollow titanium blades. The losing the engineering expertise to develop the technology. aerodynamic performance. technology, derived from civil turbofans, cuts weight by around 40 per cent. Mehta said the current version of the LiftSystem is about 320kg At an aero engine test base in Bristol, Rolls-Royce engineers are ’Our programme for one cycle of the simulation uses as much lighter than the original demonstrator but is also stronger and more working on a new power system for the F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike processing power as a PlayStation running for 14 years,’ said Mehta. reliable. Fighter (JSF), the latest generation of combat aircraft. Dubbed the ’We’ve done more than 1,000 of those simulations.’ LiftSystem, the technology will enable short take-off and vertical He added: ’This time last year, we did our first hover and first vertical landing operations for the F-35B variant of the JSF programme, which landing. Those two events were the start of proving that all our work is planned to enter service with the US Marine Corps in 2012. the preceding year was accurate. We did vertical landings and nothing untoward happened. We’ve since done 58 vertical landings, 79 hovers, Rolls-Royce's LiftSystem for 90 slow landings and 95 short take-offs, and nothing has gone wrong.’ “Our programme for one Orders for the LiftSystem are the Joint Strike Fighter cycle uses as much power expected to total more than 600, and the US Marine Corps and the 28 March 2011 | By Ellie Zolfagharifard as a PlayStation running for Italian Navy have already acquired the system. There are still several R 14 years” years of flight tests remaining, and NEIL MEHTA, ROLLS-ROYCE shipborne trials are due to take place later this year. Production of the system for use in training aircraft is under way and Rolls-Royce is Landing:a runway is not needed delivering one LiftSystem per month. Designed around the airflows are two counter-rotating bladed discs, or Mehta said the UK is in a strong position to continue developing the ’blisks’, manufactured using individual hollow blades joined to the disc technology. ’We developed the Pegasus engine that goes in the Harrier, through linear friction welding. The blisks take air from the top of the and we’ve now developed the LiftSystem,’ he said. ’There are no other fuselage and blast it through a vane box at the bottom of the craft. Western countries with that kind of expertise.’ Each vane box can be directed independently, so the air can be generated fore and aft. !" # At the rear of the aircraft, thrust is produced from a rotating nozzle known as the three-bearing swivel module (3BSM). In normal flight, 20,000lb cold thrust Two-stage counter-rotating fan the nozzle points rearwards, propelling the aircraft forwards at speeds of up to Mach 1.6. When vertical thrust is required, the nozzle swivels Uses hollow blisk technology downwards in less than two seconds, creating a vertical thrust of up to $% & 20,000lb, equalling the force generated by the Liftfan. Directs 20,000lb of thrust from the main engine Stabilising this force are two small ’roll posts’ in the wings. These ducts Rotates 95° in less than two seconds each direct 2,000lb of thrust during short take-off and vertical landing. Compact flap mechanics regulate the amount of thrust produced by ' each of the roll posts. During short take-off, the roll posts are opened Directs 2,000lb bypass thrust from the main engine Rotating fan: situated behind the cockpit and the clutch is engaged, the 3BSM is swivelled downwards and power from the main engine is increased to produce enough thrust Hydraulically actuated nozzles during short take-off operations The LiftSystem will allow a fighter aircraft to achieve both vertical lift from the Liftfan. Looking up: the F-35B will achieve vertical lift and supersonic capabilities. Like the Harrier, the F-35B will be able to Provides aircraft roll control and lateral stability land without a runway and take off like a helicopter, while performing ’One of the big challenges for the LiftSystem is that we only use it for When, in December, Britain’s Harrier jets landed at RAF Cottesmore for as a fighter aircraft. At the heart of the system is a component known short take-off and landing,’ said Mehta. ’In a normal mission, that is the final time, the sombre mood weighed on all those present. In a as the Liftfan. This a 50in (127cm), two-stage, counter-rotating fan only around five per cent of the total activity. So, at that point, we Lockheed Martin F-35B Lightning ll ritual known as the ’walk of honour’, the pilots disembarked from their capable of generating 20,000lb (9,000kg) of thrust. Situated just have to make sure the system is low weight, otherwise it’s not earning aircraft and walked away without taking a single look back. behind the cockpit, it produces the aircraft’s forward vertical lift. ’The its keep in there.’ http://www.theengineer.co.uk/in-depth/rolls-royces- liftsystem-for-the-joint-strike-fighter/1008008.article The Shaft Driven Lift Fan Propulsion System for the Joint Strike Fighter P. M. Bevilaqua ASTOVL Program Manager http://www.dtic.mil/dticasd/sbir/sbir032/n184.doc “...The primary objectives of these tests were to prove the feasibility of chang- ing the operating point of the turbine section to provide power for driving the lift fan, and the ability to rapidly transfer thrust from the cruise engine to the lift fan and back, in order to provide pitch control power. The dual cycle operation of the engine was successfully demonstrated by connecting the lift fan to the engi- ne, & then increasing engine speed to full power along the STOVL operating line. Pitch control is obtained by coordinating the area change on the cruise en- gine nozzle with the movement of the lift fan inlet guide vanes. At constant en- gine speed, increasing the nozzle area produces more turbine power & re- duces the engine thrust. Opening the inlet guide vanes produces more lift fan thrust. If the movement is coordinated, thrust is transferred from the aft nozzle to the lift fan, while the total thrust remains constant. This provides a large pitching moment which can be used to control the aircraft in hover. Since thrust transfer is accomplished without changes in engine speed, high respon- se rates are achieved. In addition, the pitch control loop is decoupled fromthe total thrust control loop which is used to command changes in sink rate....” The Shaft Driven Lift Fan Propulsion System ratio for the STOVL and subsonic mission segments and a low bypass ratio for the supersonic mission segments. for the Joint Strike Fighter Segment Short Subsonic Supersonic Vertical The purpose of this paper is to describe an Take Off Cruise Combat Acceleration Landing innovative, dual cycle propulsion system that increases Paul M. Bevilaqua the bypass ratio of the cruise engine for short take off and Wing Jet High Low High Low Low High Low Reaction High Low Need T ASTOVL Program Manager Lift Lift T/W SFC T/W IR Drag sp SFC Control T/W HGI vertical landing, without oversizing the engine or creating Lockheed Martin Skunk Works an unacceptable footprint. As shown in Figure 3, the Feature Jet Vector High Mixed Hot Low Thrust High Cold effective bypass ratio is increased by installing a lift fan Palmdale, California Flap Thrust BPR Flow Parts BPR Balance Transfer BPR Jets Aft behind the cockpit. For STOVL operations, the lift fan is http://www.dtic.mil/dticasd/sbir/sbir032/n184.doc connected to the cruise engine by engaging a clutch on a Variable Bypass Ratio drive shaft extending from the front of the engine. The Abstract large wing, while the acceleration time drives the design engine operating point is simultaneously changed to Analysis and testing are used to show the feasibility toward a small wing. There is an intermediate wing size convert some of the jet thrust to shaft horsepower. For of an innovative shaft driven lift fan propulsion system that simultaneously satisfies all of the conventional cruise flight, the lift fan is disconnected and the engine for supersonic STOVL aircraft. Dual cycle operation of performance goals, as shown in the Figure. Although this operating point is changed to produce jet thrust, rather the cruise engine makes it possible to convert some of the design point requires somewhat more thrust than a design Figure 2: Analysis of Propulsion System Features than shaft horsepower. The engine then operates as a jet thrust to shaft horsepower for driving the lift fan. that satisfies any single goal, both the short take off and and devise a vertical lift system that would meet them. conventional mixed flow turbofan. Operation of the propulsion system is described and it is vertical landing goals require even greater thrust. The requirement to perform STOVL strike and close air The result is a dual cycle propulsion system with a analytically shown that the designs of the engine, drive Because the STOVL performance goals require more support missions was derived from top level military much higher bypass ratio in the vertical flight mode than shaft, and clutch are within the state of the art. A thrust than the combat goals, some form of thrust campaign strategies [1]. Each of the required missions in the conventional flight mode. This system provides demonstrator engine and lift fan were assembled from augmentation is necessary. Increasing vertical thrust by was then subdivided into its mission segment tasks. Each high levels of thrust augmentation with a cool, low available components and operated for almost 200 hours afterburning is not a satisfactory solution, due to the high segment task was further decomposed into needed pressure footprint, excess control power, and minimal in a full size airframe model. Testing proved the temperatures and velocities of the lift jets generated by performance capabilities, in order to reach a level where effect on the design of the airframe. Since the cruise feasibility of changing the engine cycle to drive the lift this approach. Increasing the size of the cruise engine to specific design features could be identified to meet the engine is optimized for conventional flight, the fan, and of rapidly transferring thrust back and forth provide sufficient vertical thrust is not an optimal mission objectives. performance of the propulsion system is not penalized for between the engine and lift fan to provide pitch control. solution either, because the engine would then be larger its STOVL capability. The durability of the mechanical drive system and flight than necessary for conventional flight. This would A simplified version of this analysis for the weight gearbox were also demonstrated. impose a weight penalty, because the inlets, nozzle, and propulsion system is shown in Figure 2. For example, In this paper, the results of analysis and testing will airframe would also be larger than necessary. Also, when the subsonic cruise mission segment requires low specific be used to show the feasibility of this shaft driven lift fan this oversized engine is throttled back for cruise, fuel fuel consumption, which requires a high bypass ratio propulsion system. In the next section, the dual cycle Introduction consumption would be increased. engine. The actual fan diameter and pressure ratio would operation of the cruise engine will be described, and be determined at the next level of decomposition. At the analysis will be used to show that the design of the The next generation strike fighter will need to The method of functional analysis was used to level shown, the Figure highlights the essential design engine, drive shaft, and clutch are within the state of the combine the short takeoff and vertical landing systematically analyze the conflicting performance goals problem: the STOVL, cruise, and combat segments art. The results of propulsion system tests performed capabilities of the AV-8B Harrier with the supersonic require high bypass ratios, while the supersonic segment with a lift fan and demonstrator engine assembled from performance of the F-16C Falcon, while providing requires a low bypass ratio. The ideal solution would be available components will be presented in the section greater range and increased survivability. This 1.3 a variable cycle propulsion system, with a high bypass after that. The Allison Advanced Development Company combination of vertical and supersonic performance Direct Lift Design Point demonstrated the performance of the lift fan, gearbox, requirements means that engine design, always an 1.2 STO and shaft for the high power levels of a production important part of any new airplane program, is a VL propulsion system. The Pratt & Whitney engine 1.1 Thrust to CTOL particularly significant factor in the development of a Design company assembled a dual cycle F100-PW-229-plus Weight Point new strike fighter. The engine must provide enough Ratio 1.0 engine from components of existing engines. It was (TSL / WTO ) vertical thrust for short takeoffs and vertical landings, but Transonic Acceleration operated in the conventional mode and then used to drive must not be so large that it increases supersonic drag or .9 the Allison lift fan to demonstrate operation in the fuel consumption during cruise. Sustained Turn STOVL mode. Instantaneous Turn Figure 1 shows the maneuver and acceleration .8 constraints on the thrust to weight ratio, T/W, and wing Dual Cycle Thermodynamics 0 loading, W/S, of a representative strike fighter. The 0 2030405060708090 The energy to drive the lift fan is extracted from the Wing Loading (W / S) curves are obtained by setting thrust equal to drag for TO air that flows through the cruise engine. The change in each of the performance goals. To minimize engine size, the energy of the air as it passes through an engine the maneuver goals drive the airframe design toward a Figure 1: Performance Constraints on T/W and W/S operating in a conventional turbojet cycle is shown in ______Figure 4. Energy is added to the air as it passes through Presented at the American Helicopter Society 53rd Annual Forum, Virginia Beach, Virginia, April 29 - May 1, 1997. the fan and compressor, as seen in the Figure. The Copyright 1997 by the American Helicopter Society, Inc. All rights reserved. magnitude of the added energy is representative of the Figure 3: Shaft Driven Lift Fan Propulsion System 12/ station 5 to drop to atmospheric pressure. The larger Mv ª M º = pressure drop across the turbine produces more shaft « » 80,000 horsepower, while reducing the thrust of the core flow. mV ¬ m ¼ Stall Limit Turbine Power 70,000 100, 000 HP Engaging the clutch at the same time as the nozzle area is Fuel Burn 200, 000 HP STOVL Nozzle Power so that the jet thrust increases with the square root of the increased transfers the additional power to the lift fan, so Energy 80, 000 HP 60,000 (HP-hr) mass flow ratio. Efficiency that the speed of the engine does not increase. This is 50,000 25000 .93 Waste Heat Shaft SHP .92 shown by the two points in Figure 6. The lower point is Compressor Work 120, 000 HP 100, 000 HP To actually transfer the energy to a larger mass of Horsepower .91 40,000 .90 the conventional operating point and the upper point is air, another turbine stage is added to the engine. The .89 .88 2345 6 .87 used when the lift fan is engaged. Nearly 25,000 CTOL .86 energy extracted by this power turbine is used to drive an 30,000 .85 horsepower can be extracted before the turbine section additional fan, as shown in Figure 5. The power turbine Ideal 20,000 Operating reaches its stall limit. The thrust that can be produced and fan are mechanically independent of the rotating Line with this much power depends on the diameter and components of the basic gas generator. Because energy 10,000 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 pressure ratio of the lift fan. For example, with a fan is extracted from the hot primary flow, the thrust of the Normalized RPM (N / Rt) diameter of 40 in to 50 in, the thrust is on the order of engine core exhaust flow is reduced. However, there is a 15,000 to 20,000 pounds. net thrust increase for the complete turbofan system. Figure 4: Energy Changes through a Turbojet Engine Figure 6: Turbine Performance Map Because the net pressure drop from the turbine entry The shaft driven lift fan propulsion system increases to the nozzle exit does not change, the static temperature newest generation of engines. This energy appears as an thrust in a similar way; that is, energy is extracted from and the engine speed stabilizes. Because its speed is of the exhaust jet is also unchanged. Therefore, increase in both the pressure and temperature of the air. the hot turbine exhaust flow and transferred to a larger higher, the engine produces more thrust. The locus of extracting power from the gas stream does not change Following compression, additional energy is added to the mass of air by the lift fan. However, the power to drive steady state matching conditions defines the engine the waste heat, which is the excess static temperature of air by burning fuel in the combustor at constant pressure. the lift fan is not obtained with a separate power turbine, operating line, which is the diagonal running from the the exhaust jet. However, the total temperature of the jet but by changing the operating point of the turbine that bottom left to the top right in Figure 6. The engine and Energy is then extracted from the hot, high pressure is reduced. The equation for the change in turbine power drives the engine fan. This can be understood by compressor are designed so that the turbine power and gas by the turbine section. Since the turbine drives the is compressor, the amount of energy extracted by the examining the performance map of a typical turbine compressor power match near the point of maximum section, as shown in Figure 6. At any point on the map, efficiency at every speed. turbine is the same as the amount added by the ''SHP mc p T0 the power produced by the turbine is given by, compressor. This energy loss is seen as a drop in the If the clutch connecting the engine to the lift fan is so that extracting 25,000 shaft horsepower reduces the pressure and temperature of the gas. The energy J 1 engaged at the same time as the fuel flow is increased, the ª º total temperature of the jet approximately 250 degrees remaining in the hot gas that leaves the turbine section is Turbine Power = mc T«1 () P P J » additional power can be used to accelerate the lift fan, converted to thrust by expanding it through a nozzle. The p 04 5 4 Fahrenheit in this engine. ¬« ¼» instead of the engine. By selecting the fuel flow to match temperature and pressure of the gas drop as it expands the power produced by the turbine to the power required The energy equation for the exhaust jet can be through the nozzle. Although the static pressure of the in which T04 is the stagnation temperature of the gas to drive the lift fan, the engine speed can be held written in the form gas returns to atmospheric pressure, the temperature of constant. The process is similar to depressing the gas entering the turbine section, and P5 /P4 is the pressure 2 the exhaust jet remains higher than the atmospheric drop across the turbine section. pedal in an automobile with a manual transmission. With TTvc0 / 2 p temperature, so that this energy is lost as waste heat. the clutch disengaged, stepping on the gas causes the Increasing the fuel flow produces more turbine Since the exhaust velocity is determined by the jet thrust The thrust of the engine can be increased if the engine to accelerate. Engaging the clutch at the same power by increasing T04. The additional power and mass flow rate, vFm , the energy equation for the energy in the exhaust jet is transferred to a larger mass of time as you depress the gas pedal transfers the power to accelerates the engine until the power absorbed by the the drive wheels, so that the engine does not accelerate. air, rather than simply being expanded through the compressor matches the power produced by the turbine, nozzle. The following simple analysis illustrates this However, in a STOVL aircraft the requirement is to phenomenon. If the thrust of the exhaust jet is mV , then increase the maximum thrust of the engine. But at 2 its kinetic energy flux is m V / 2 . Transferring this maximum thrust, the turbine inlet temperature, T04, is quantity of energy to a larger mass of air reduces the already at the material limit of the turbine section. As a velocity of the exhaust jet. This can be written, result, the gas temperature can not be increased to provide the energy to drive the lift fan. In the dual cycle 1 2 1 2 engine, the additional power is obtained by increasing the 2 Mv = 2 mV pressure drop across the turbine section. As seen in so that the jet velocities are inversely proportional to the Figure 7, the pressure rises through the compressor, square root of the jet mass flows, remains constant through the combustor, then drops 12/ through the turbine section and nozzle, in two steps. This v ª m º Turbojet Engine Turbofan Engine is shown by the solid line in the Figure. = « » V ¬ M ¼ Increasing the nozzle exit area reduces the pressure drop across the nozzle, causing a corresponding increase The ratio of the thrust of the two jets is obtained by in the pressure drop across the turbine. For example, substituting this equation for the velocity ratio in the increasing the nozzle area so that A = A , as shown by expression for the thrust ratio, Figure 5: A Power Turbine Drives the Engine Fan 6 5 the dashed lines in Figure 7, causes the static pressure at Figure 7: Nozzle Area Controls Turbine Power exhaust jet can be written in terms of the nozzle thrust as, 13 ª º 2 « 16 u SHP » Fm d 3000 TT « 4 » 0 2c «SZV 1 f » p ¬ ¼ Therefore, the reduction in total temperature appears as a Figure 10 shows how the diameter of an aluminum 2000 reduction in thrust at the nozzle exit. However, it shaft transmitting 25,000 horsepower varies with the Horsepower reappears as a reduction in stagnation temperature when speed of the engine. The lower limit is a solid core shaft 1000 the jet impinges on the ground during vertical landings, and the upper limit is a thin wall shaft with a wall and this reduces heating of the surface material. thickness equal to 5% of the shaft diameter. The solid 5000 RPM 3500 RPM 0 The net effect of changing the turbine operating shaft is smaller, but the thin wall shaft is lighter. The 010203040 point is to transfer thrust from the engine exhaust jet at design of a shaft is more complicated than this, because it Time (seconds) the back of the aircraft to the lift jet at the front of the depends on the number of support bearings and the aircraft. The relative magnitude of the energy transferred natural frequencies of the shaft, but an aluminum shaft several inches in diameter can transmit the power is illustrated in Figure 8. It is a fraction of the total Figure 11: Clutch Size Decreases with Engagement Figure 9: Hybrid Fan Engine required to drive the lift fan. energy available in the engine, and less than the power Time being extracted to drive the engine fan and compressor. meant that these engines produced less thrust in the The clutch that connects the drive shaft to the lift fan Although the low pressure spool of the engine does have vertical mode than in the cruise mode. The tandem fan has two functions. The first is to reduce the shock of The horsepower absorbed by the clutch during the to be redesigned to handle the additional power, the engines can be classified between the single cycle engagement by slipping during the period of engagement. engagement period decreases as the engagement period energy levels are not extraordinary. The technology Pegasus engine and the dual cycle shaft driven lift fan The second is to efficiently transmit the torque of the increases, required to convert an existing military engine to drive a propulsion system. driveshaft to the lift fan, when the clutch is engaged. The lift fan is comparable to converting the military engine to simplest clutches use the friction between two surfaces to IZ 2 / 2 a high bypass ratio commercial engine. It is well within accomplish both functions. However, the number of HP the state of the art. t Mechanical Drive Components disks and the size of the springs required to press them The shaft driven lift fan propulsion system is a together in order to transmit 25,000 HP would result in a 2 Power is the product of force times velocity. in which the IZ / 2 is the rotational kinetic energy of development of the Tandem Fan propulsion system [2] heavy clutch. Therefore, the horsepower transmitted by a drive shaft is the lift fan after it is connected to the engine, and t is the and the Hybrid Fan engine [3]. The Hybrid Fan engine is equal to the product of torque and angular velocity, time of engagement. As seen in Figure 11, the knee of shown in Figure 9. Both of these engines combined a To reduce the size of the clutch, friction is only used the curve is near 10 seconds at low engine speeds. This low bypass ratio cruise cycle with a high bypass ratio SHP W uZ to accelerate the lift fan from rest to the relatively low two step engagement strategy permits the design of a STOVL cycle. In the STOVL cycle, the flow from the idle speed of the engine before take off, or during relatively lightweight clutch. The shaft must be designed to resist the torque. For a engine fan was diverted from the engine core to nozzles approach to the landing area. Less than full power is given horsepower, the torque decreases as the rotational at the front of the aircraft. Therefore, the engine fan transmitted under these conditions, so that a small multi- velocity of the shaft increases, Propulsion System Demonstration became the lift fan. However, the operating point of the disc friction clutch can be used to perform this Although analysis had shown that the designs of a turbine was not changed to produce additional power to SHP engagement. Once the speed of the lift fan matches the drive the lift fan. In addition, the loss of the W engine speed, a mechanical lockup is engaged. This is dual cycle engine, drive shaft, clutch and lift fan are supercharging effect of the engine fan on the core flow Z used to transmit full power when the engine speed is within the state of the art, there were practical concerns increased for short takeoffs and vertical landings. regarding the development of such a propulsion system. The high rotational speeds typical of jet engines, around For example, there were concerns about the weight and 10,000 rpm, make it possible to transmit large amounts of 250 efficiency of the gearbox that drives the lift fan, and power with relatively small driveshafts. In terms of the questions regarding the ability of the engine control Turbine Power maximum unit shear stress of the drive shaft material, V , Fuel Burn 100,000 HP system to synchronize the change in nozzle area with the 200,000 HP and the polar moment of inertia of the shaft, Ip, the 200 Energy operation of the lift fan, and the ability to rapidly transfer Nozzle Power (HP-hr) Lift Fan Power torsion formula for round shafts gives for the diameter of 55, 000 HP thrust from the engine to the lift fan for pitch control. To 25, 000 HP the shaft, Waste Heat 150 demonstrate the feasibility of the shaft driven lift fan Compressor Work 120, 000 HP 100, 000 HP Shaft Diameter propulsion system, the Allison, Pratt & Whitney, and 2VI (Inches) p Rolls Royce engine companies built and tested a 2345 6 d 100 W .05 Thin Wall demonstrator engine. To minimize the costs of this demonstration and show the relatively low risk associated Solid Core For hollow round shafts, the polar moment of inertia is 50 with developing a dual cycle engine, the demonstrator engine and lift fan were assembled from existing engine Sdf44 1 0 components. I p 0 123 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 32 RPM (x1000) in which f is fraction of the shaft diameter that is hollow. Figure 10: Driveshaft Diameter Decreases with RPM Figure 8: Energy from the Jet Drives the Lift Fan The formula for the diameter of the shaft becomes, The successful completion of these tests demonstrated the 0.6 Summary 04 8121620 feasibility of building a lightweight lift fan and gearbox Time (Sec) The shaft driven lift fan provides a solution to many at the design power levels. of the problems associated with the development of a The Pratt & Whitney engine company combined the supersonic STOVL strike fighter. It provides high levels fan and core of a F100-PW-220 engine with the low Figure 14: Response to Pitch Control Commands of thrust augmentation, with a relatively cool, low pressure turbine from the more powerful F100-PW-229 pressure footprint. The aircraft is balanced in hover engine to create the dual cycle PW-229 plus engine. The because thrust is transferred from the rear of the aircraft fan drum rotor was modified for attaching the shaft to to the front, without increasing frontal area. Pitch and drive the lift fan, and the fan duct was modified so that roll control power are also obtained by transferring thrust the bypass air could be diverted to the ducts that supply around the aircraft without changing total lift. Since the the roll control jets. The digital electronic engine control cruise engine is optimized for conventional flight, the software was modified to control fuel flow and nozzle performance of the engine is not penalized for STOVL area on the STOVL operating line of the turbine map. capability. Removing the lift fan creates a conventional Rolls Royce, Ltd. built the variable area thrust vectoring strike fighter with little penalty for commonality. lift/cruise nozzle and the offtake ducts and nozzles for the The feasibility and mechanical integrity of the shaft Figure 12: Two Stage Lift Fan with Gearbox roll control jets. and reduces the engine thrust. Opening the inlet guide driven lift fan propulsion system has been successfully The engine was first run without the lift fan demonstrated. Analysis has shown that up to 25,000 The production lift fan system is shown in Figure 12. It vanes produces more lift fan thrust. If the movement is connected to demonstrate operation in the cruise mode. shaft horsepower can be extracted from the exhaust jet of consists of a two stage counter rotating fan section, with coordinated, thrust is transferred from the aft nozzle to Then the lift fan was connected to demonstrate operation a modern turbofan engine to drive a lift fan. Due to the variable inlet guide vanes to modulate the thrust of each the lift fan, while the total thrust remains constant. This in the STOVL mode. The primary objectives of these high rotational speed of the engine, this power can be stage at constant rotational speed. This arrangement of provides a large pitching moment which can be used to tests were to prove the feasibility of changing the transmitted with a drive shaft less than 10 inches in the fans permits the use of two driven gears, which control the aircraft in hover. Since thrust transfer is operating point of the turbine section to provide power diameter. A relatively lightweight clutch can be reduces the load on each gear tooth in half. This keeps accomplished without changes in engine speed, high for driving the lift fan, and the ability to rapidly transfer employed by engaging the lift fan at low engine speeds, the power at a level similar to that currently being used response rates are achieved. In addition, the pitch control thrust from the cruise engine to the lift fan and back, in and using mechanical lockup to transmit the full engine on heavy lift helicopters. Spiral bevel gears will be used loop is decoupled from the total thrust control loop which order to provide pitch control power. The dual cycle power at high speeds. to accommodate the speed and torque requirements of the is used to command changes in sink rate. operation of the engine was successfully demonstrated by system. The nozzle consists of two telescoping hood Practical concerns regarding the ability of the engine connecting the lift fan to the engine, and then increasing Figure 14 shows the response of the propulsion segments to deflect the lift fan thrust aft during takeoff. control system to synchronize the operation of the lift fan engine speed to full power along the STOVL operating system to a command to rapidly cycle the thrust between and cruise engine were addressed by testing a The demonstrator lift fan shown in Figure 13 line [4]. maximum nose up and maximum nose down moments. demonstrator propulsion system. The Allison Advanced represents one stage of the production system. However, Six complete cycles were performed in 16 seconds. The Pitch control is obtained by coordinating the area Development Company demonstrated the performance of the single fan of the demonstrator system operates at the response rate is excellent. The larger variation in the change on the cruise engine nozzle with the movement of the fan, gearbox, and shaft under the high power gear same power level as one stage of the production system. peak to peak thrust split is due to differences in the the lift fan inlet guide vanes. At constant engine speed, loading of the production system. The Pratt & Whitney The first stage fan and inlet guide vanes from the Pratt & nozzle discharge coefficient between the small scale increasing the nozzle area produces more turbine power engine company assembled a dual cycle F110-PW-229 Whitney F119 engine were used for the lift fan. The nozzles which were used to design the nozzle schedule plus engine from existing components, and Rolls Royce Allison Advanced Development Company had gears and the full size nozzles. This illustrates the differences provided a variable area thrust vectoring nozzle. Testing manufactured using two different processes. The first set that can be expected when small scale data is used to of the assembled components proved the feasibility of had teeth generated and hard finished on the same design full size hardware. The control schedules could changing the engine cycle to produce jet thrust or shaft machine to provide high quality gears with a parallel be corrected to eliminate the overshoot. However, this horsepower, and of quickly transferring enough thrust to depth tooth form. The second set were finish ground on a would not change the dynamic response, and therefore control the aircraft in hover. A total of 200 hours of Weiner grinder so that a more sophisticated tooth contact was not felt to be necessary. trouble free operation were achieved during testing of the pattern could be produced. Both designs were This demonstration of the shaft driven lift fan propulsion system successfully manufactured. However, the hard finished propulsion system was highly successful. More than 40 gears were used in the demonstrator system, because they 1. Jackson, R., “The Value of STOVL”, Proceedings of hours of static testing were accomplished with no were the first set completed. Since the ground tooth gear the International Powered Lift Conference, SAE Paper problems in the operation of the engine, mechanical drive set were also completed successfully, they are preferred 962301, November, 1996 | 2. Driggers, H., Powers, S., system, or lift fan. The test proved the feasibility of for the operational aircraft. Roush, R “Study of Aerodynamic Technology for Single changing the cycle of the cruise engine to provide power Engine VSTOL Fighter/Attack Aircraft” NASA CR 166271, Allison demonstrated the performance of the to drive the lift fan, and demonstrated the capability to February, 1982 | 3. Ward, B., Penrose, C., “The Hybrid complete lift fan, gearbox, and drive shaft at the high rapidly transfer thrust back and forth from the cruise Fan Vectored Thrust Engine”, Aerospace Congress and power gear loading of the operational aircraft [4]. The engine to the lift fan to provide pitch control. As a result Exposition, SAE Paper 831496, October, 1983 | 4. Bevil- power transfer efficiency of the gear set was measured. of these tests, the propulsion system was installed in a aqua, P., et al “ASTOVL Aircraft Technology Demonstr- Vertical operation of the lubrication system and the oil full size airframe model and operated for another 160 ation Program”, LMSW TR 96-1, May, 1996 | 5. Eshleman, cooling system were demonstrated, and the ability of the hours to study jet effects in hover and transition [5]. J., “Large Scale Testing of the Lockheed Martin JSF inlet guide vanes to modulate the fan thrust was shown. Figure 13: Single Stage Demonstrator Lift Fan Configuration”, Proceedings of the International Power- The distortion limits of the lift fan were also measured. FOOTNOTES ed Lift Conference, SAE Paper 962296, November, 1996 http://www. codeonemagazine .com/images/ media/2014_3BSN_ 20_Config_141B_ 1267828237_8729.jpg http:// www.codeone magazine.com http:// F-35B /images/ www.codeonemagazine media/2014_3 .com/images/ BSN_07_Basic media/2014_3BSN_10_ _Nozzle_1_W_ Basic_Nozzle_2_W.jpg_ 1267828237_6 1267828237_4202.jpg 3BSN 3 Bearing Swivel Nozzle 442.jpg and other engine manufacturers developed compact turbojet engines specifically for such applications. Various combinations +LVWRUy Of The F-35B Swivel Duct of numbers and locations of engines were built and flown on several VTOL prototypes and experimental aircraft. Three-bearing swivel nozzle designs were studied by virtually all of the engine companies in the mid 1960s. The US Patent ByKevin Renshaw Posted 12 June 2014 Office received applications for many variations of the 3BSD from Pratt & Whitney, General Electric, and even from Boeing Military Aircraft of Wichita, Kansas. http://www.code By the late 1960s, Pratt & Whitney was designing and testing a three-bearing swivel nozzle for use on the Convair Model 200 Sea Control fighter. Design drawings dated 1967 show detail design layouts. The first nozzle was built and tested on a Pratt & onemagazine. Whitney JT8D in the mid 1960s. The tests included operating the nozzle in full afterburner with the nozzle deflected ninety degrees. The test rig was positioned to exhaust upward to avoid heating the ground under the test stand, though subsequent com/article.html tests positioned the nozzle downward at the ground to assess the effects of ground proximity back pressure on nozzle ?item_id=137 performance. The Convair Model 200 was proposed in June 1972 to respond to the US Navy request for designs for a fighter/attack aircraft $FULWLFDOFRPSRQHQWRIWKH)%VKRUW takeoff/ for the Sea Control Ships. The VTOL aircraft would have used a PW401 engine with an afterburning 3BSD plus twin Allison vertical landing, STOVL, variant of the Lightningg IIII XJ99 lift engines located behind the cockpit for added vertical lift forward of the center of gravity to balance the aft nozzle is the three-bearing swivel duct nozzle, or 3BSD.D. thrust. To deal with ground environment generated by the combination of the afterburning rear nozzle and the high The nozzle, mounted at the back of the aircraft,, temperatures and pressures of the lift engines, the ships would be equipped with special vertical landing areas with metal allows the thrust from the Pratt & Whitney F1355 grates to allow the hot air flow to pass through. engine to be vectored from straight aft for conventional flight to straight down for STOVL This same request for designs led to the development of the Rockwell XFV-12 ejector augmented lift design. The Rockwell operations. The 3BSD can move through ninety- design was selected for prototyping but proved unable to produce enough thrust for vertical flight. Some have reasoned that five degrees of motion seamlessly with no change the Navy selected the ejector design knowing that it would fail, thus eliminating a potential threat the smaller Sea Control in engine operation. The nozzle also provides yaw Ships posed to the large Nimitz class carriers with conventional catapult and trap equipment. Whatever the case, the three- control during hover and during transitions to bearing swivel nozzle design was relegated to the file cabinets at Convair in San Diego, California. hover. DARPA ASTOVL And Beyond Origins Studies continued through the 1970s and 1980s on STOVL fighters to replace the Harrier. The studies usually added Interest in designs for vertical takeoff and landing, supersonic performance and multimission avionics and radar that the Harrier did not have in its original design. or VTOL, fighter aircraft began in the 1960s at the The United States and the United Kingdom collaborated on studies of propulsive lift systems for the next generation of VTOL height of the Cold War when NATO bases were and STOVL aircraft. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, or DARPA, started the STOVL Strike Fighter studies seen as vulnerable to preemptive attacks. Such in the late 1980s. Lockheed, General Dynamics, McDonnell Douglas, and Boeing all developed concepts. The studies led to aircraft, secured in hardened shelters, could still the Advanced STOVL competition that Lockheed won. In 1993, Lockheed purchased the General Dynamics Fort Worth take off and land from bases with damaged operation, which by then was the only GD division involved with aircraft manufacturing and design. runways. The DARPA program later evolved into the tri-service Joint Advanced Strike Technology, or JAST effort, which evolved into The United States, United Kingdom, Germany, the Joint Strike Fighter concept, then the X-35B prototype, and finally to today’s F-35B. and France all built and tested multiple VTOL fighter designs. However, only the British The DARPA program included construction and wind tunnel tests of a Large Scale Powered Model, or LSPM, used to Kestrel/Harrier family made it into service. measure the aerodynamics and propulsion interaction of the shaft-driven lift system developed by Lockheed. Meanwhile, only the Yak-38, which used a similar This view shows the motors that turn the segments of the The original design for the primary nozzle on the LSPM was a two-dimensional Single Expansion Ramp Nozzle, called SERN. engine and nozzle arrangement to the Harrier, duct and the loop in the fluid lines almost identical to the saw service on the Russian side. On this design, one nozzle flap is longer than the other. The nozzle vectors the primary thrust by deflecting the upper flap 1972 design. The X-35 and F-35 nozzles use jet fuel as through at least ninety degrees. To control the nozzle exit area in hover, the lower flap was designed as a sliding panel that US Navy studies in the 1960s evaluated Sea the working fluid to drive the nozzle motion – hence the would retract as needed to adjust the backpressure on the engine – a critical control needed to make the shaft-driven lift fan Control VTOL aircraft designed to operate from turbine work. Rolls-Royce was contracted to build the LSPM nozzle to run behind a Pratt & Whitney F100 engine and to ships with smaller decks than from decks on term “fueldraulics." The engine-mounted fuel pumps design the X-35 prototype nozzle. traditional aircraft carriers. These proposed provide the pressure for the fuel to drive the actuators. As Lockheed began small-scale wind tunnel tests of the nozzle under the DARPA program and as Rolls-Royce began building fighters would take off vertically with full loads. Then the fuel goes into the engine to be burned. The Navy’s concept of operations would also the LSPM hardware, the shortcomings of the design became more apparent. require these aircraft operate as traditional carrier-launched fighters, which necessitated afterburning engines. However, trying to turn the flow with the upper flap and getting the flow to turn around the sharp lower lip produced a poor This dual operational approach led to larger, heavier aircraft designs that needed more vertical thrust than could be provided thrust coefficient. In effect, the engine flow was running into a wall (the upper flap in the deflected position) and separating by just the primary engine or engines. The most popular solution was to add small lift engines just aft of the cockpit to provide across the lower lip. The nozzle was also gaining weight. The flat sides and large upper flap did not make a good pressure vertical thrust forward of the aircraft center of gravity. These designs were called Lift Plus Lift/Cruise. Allison, Rolls-Royce, vessel. Thicker material and significant amounts of external stiffening were needed to hold the nozzle shape and to permit the flaps to seal. Moving a six-foot-long upper flap against full engine thrust required a very large and heavy actuator. Throughout the 1970s and 1980s, the Soviet Navy wanted a supersonic STOVL fighter to operate from its ski jump equipped carriers. At what point the Yakovlev Design Bureau became aware of the multi-swivel nozzle design is not known, but the The tests of the LSPM in the NASA-Ames wind tunnel and on a hover test stand proved the shaft-driven lift fan system could Soyuz engine company created its own variant of it. The Yak-41 version of the nozzle, from published pictures, appears to be operate. A better solution was needed for the nozzle of the X-35B, however. a three-bearing swivel duct with a significant offset “kink.” The Yak-141 also used two RKBM RD-41 lift engines – an almost At this same time, Lockheed was integrating parts of the former General Dynamics team into the ASTOVL effort. Engineers identical arrangement to the Convair Model 200 design. The aircraft was also re-labeled as a Yak-141 to imply a production from Fort Worth had access to the archives from Convair that were transferred to Fort Worth when the San Diego operation version, but no order for follow-on series came from the Russian Navy. closed. The Yak-141 was flown at the Paris Airshow in 1991. The flight displays of the Yak were suspended when the heat from the Included in these archives were the Model 200 documents – particularly the description of the nozzle. In October 1994, Pratt & lift engines started to dislodge asphalt from the tarmac. At the 1992 Farnborough show, the Yak was limited to conventional Whitney funded the Lockheed Fort Worth team to perform a study of the 3BSD for the ASTOVL configuration. This effort takeoffs and landings with hovers performed 500 feet above the runway to avoid a repeat performance of asphalt damage. evaluated ground clearance of the nozzle in vertical lift position, calculated aft body drag of the nozzle, and predicted overall But the Yak-141 does deserve credit for being the first jet fighter to fly with a three-bearing swivel nozzle – twenty-five years performance of the installed propulsion system. after it was first designed in the United States. The results of that study showed that the 3BSD design was significantly lighter than the SERN nozzle. Moreover, the design During the early days of the JAST effort, Lockheed (accompanied by US government officials from the JAST program office) also showed superior propulsion performance in all modes. The 3BSD was subsequently included in the ASTOVL visited the Yakovlev Design Bureau along with several other suppliers of aviation equipment (notably also the Zvezda K-36 Configuration 141 – the original canard delta design of what evolved into the X-35. ejection seat) to examine the Yakovlev technologies and designs. The 3BSD was scaled to match the PW611 engine being designed for the X-35. The weight saved by incorporating the 3BSD Yakovlev was looking for money to keep its VTOL program alive, not having received any orders for a production version of in place of the square SERN was estimated to be more than 1,800 pounds. Moreover, the weight savings occurred at the far the Yak-141. Lockheed provided a small amount of funding in return for obtaining performance data and limited design data aft end of the aircraft and thereby helped the overall balance of the X-35 design. Furthermore, the 3BSD provided built-in yaw on the Yak-141. US government personnel were allowed to examine the aircraft. However, the 3BSN design was already in capability that the SERN did not have. The original ASTOVL design would have incorporated yaw vanes in the lift fan at some place on the X-35 before these visits. additional weight. Their position at the bottom of the lift fan would have produced unwanted rolling moments when yaw was The 3BSD was invented in America in the 1960s, proposed by Convair to the US Navy in the 1970s, first flown by the commanded. Russians in the late 1980s, re-engineered from the 1960 Pratt & Whitney design for the X-35 in the 1990s, and put into The 3BSD provides yaw control through the first swivel bearing. The resulting yaw thrust force is applied through the production for the F-35 in the 2000s. Sometimes a good idea has to wait for the right application and set of circumstances to centerline of the engine – very near the overall aircraft vertical center of gravity. In this position, the thrust force results in no come along. One moral of this story is not to throw out good work done in the past. It just might be needed later on. added rolling moment. The axisymmetric nozzle provided better thrust coefficients in both horizontal flight and vertical lift mode. The 3BSD moved the vertical thrust location of the nozzle farther forward relative to the SERN, resulting in a better hover balance between the forward lift fan and the rear nozzle. Kevin Renshaw served as the ASTOVL Chief Engineer for General Dynamics and was later the deputy to Lockheed ASTOVL Chief Engineer Rick Rezabek in 1994 when the 3BSD concept was incorporated into the X-35B design. Renshaw continues The 3BSD was then combined with low-observable, or LO, axisymmetric nozzle designs that had been recently flown on the to work in the Advanced System Development branch of Skunk Works where he is currently working on flight demonstration US Air Force F-16 fighter. Pratt engineers also dug into their archives and found much of the original design and test data on of the DARPA ARES VTOL UAV program. the 1960s development of the 3BSD. They also found designs for moving duct liner cooling air across the bearings. "C" Legs Preparing the F-35C for the carrier – Eric Tegler 03 The Lockheed ASTOVL/JAST team formally changed from the SERN nozzle to the 3BSD in 1995 with a compact axisymmetric convergent/divergent nozzle for the STOVL version and a longer set of nozzle flaps for better performance on Oct 2011 “...Nevertheless, he [Lt. Cmdr. Eric “Magic” Buus] the CTOL and CV variants. Other changes included planform trades (canards versus aft tails), inlet designs (caret inlets versus a diverterless bump inlet), landing gear arrangement, and weapons integration. stressed that the differences across type models are minimal But a critical ingredient of meeting the STOVL weight and performance had already been put in place by combining a thirty- at this point. The same can be said for the F-35’s Pratt & year-old vectoring approach with a modern engine and LO nozzle. The axisymmetric nozzle provided predictable back pressure control that worked cleanly with the Shaft Driven Lift Fan system. The pieces were falling into place. Whitney F135 engine. Save for some attached accessories Pratt & Whitney and Rolls-Royce built and flight qualified the 3BSD for the X-35 prototype using many of the design concept for the B model, there are no significant changes to the drawings from the earlier P&W work. The prototype included the liner that directs bypass cooling air through the swivel joints 43,000-pound thrust engine whether situated in an A, B, or C at all deflections, even in afterburner (though afterburner was and is not used in hover on the X-35B and F-35B). model. Buus added that the engine has the same thrust rat- The first flight of the conventional takeoff and landing X-35 occurred in October 2000 with the STOVL X-35B flying in June 2001. The prototype and production engine nozzles closely resemble the designs from the Convair installation. All three ing across all three variants and that no special anti-corros- variants of the X-35 flew with the short nozzle flaps designed for the STOVL variant. The longer LO nozzle flaps for the production F-35A variant and the F-35C variant were developed later under a production System Design and Development ion or FOD (foreign object damage) tolerance modifications effort. have been made for the F-35C. “I’d go so far as to say Russian Swivel Nozzle Designs A great deal of misinformation has appeared on the Internet regarding the relationship of the Soviet Yak-41 (later Yak-141), NATO reporting name Freestyle, to the X-35 and the rest of the JSF program. The Pratt & Whitney 3BSD nozzle design nothing at all. It’s the same engine.”...” http:// predates the Russian work. In fact the 3BSD was tested with a real engine almost twenty years before the first flight of the Yak. www.defensemedianetwork.com/stories/“c”-legs-2/ Powering the Lightning II aviation blog cites Warren Boley, President Maintainability of Pratt & Whitney Military Engines, as say- From the outset the F135 has been designed April 2012 Chris Kjelgaard ing the F135 weighs 1,500lb (680kg) more for maintainability, building on the experi- than the F119. This would put the F135’s dry ence Pratt & Whitney gained with the F100 “…The LiftFan (one of three major compo- weight at around 5,400lb (2,450kg). How- for the F-15 and F-16 and then with the F119 nents of the Rolls-Royce LiftSystem, which ever, the F135 may have a higher thrust-to- for the F-22. (When designing the F119, the provides the F-35B’s hover capability) is not weight ratio than the F119 (the F119’s over- company brought in US Air Force mechanics HQJDJHGZKLOHLQQRUPDOIRUZDUGÀLJKWDQG all pressure ratio is 26:1 compared with the to help design its engine-mounted controls does not feature at all in the F-35A CTOL )¶V DQGVRWKHOE¿JXUHPLJKW and accessories for maintainability). In the DQG)&&9FRQYHQWLRQDOWDNHRϑDQG be high. Boley has also suggested the F135 )DOOFRQWUROVDϒ[HGWRWKHFDVLQJDUH landing variants of the Lightning II. However, has an uninstalled wet-thrust capability of ‘single-deep’ – no control units are mount- IURPWKHRXWVHWWKHVSHFL¿FDWLRQIRUWKH approximately 51,000lb (226.86kN). If this ed on top of each other – and the nuts and F-35’s engine called for “tri-variant com- reads across to an installed basis – in which bolts which attach them to the engine casing patibility”: the engine powering an F-35A bleed air and shaft horsepower would be ex- are encapsulated in the control assemblies is identical to that powering an F-35B or tracted to power aircraft systems – it should themselves, so nuts and bolts stay with the an F-35C. Nevertheless, the engines are provide a comfortable operating margin over control units when these are removed. This GHVLJQDWHGGLϑHUHQWO\ WKH)$SRZHU- the 43,000lb [?] (119.27kN) of wet thrust re- greatly minimizes the risks of nuts and bolts plant is the F135-PW-100; the engine for quired by the spec…. being lost and causing foreign-object debris the F-35C is the F135-PW-400; and the …Another key feature of the F135 is its (FOD) damage. F-35B engine is the F135-PW-600. augmentor, or afterburner system. While Similarly, all engine clamps and blocks Since the F-35B powerplant needs an available details of the augmentor are stay on the engine casing when an F135 is extra LPT stage to provide the power neces- sketchy, the F135 is known to employ multi- removed for maintenance and the engine sary to turn the driveshaft (which, through zone (probably three-zone) fuel injection aft uses no safety wire, eliminating another po- a clutch and gearbox, drives the LiftFan), of the afterburner’s pilot light. These zones tential source of FOD damage. All controls F135s built to power other F-35 variants inject fuel independently, so that the after- and accessories are mounted on the bottom have the second LPT stage as well. “The en- burner does not act in an all-or-nothing way of the engine, making it easier for mechan- gine was designed to support that severe but instead provides a variable range of ad- ics to get to them; and these assemblies are STOVL requirement,” says O’Donnell. For en- ditional, smoothly transitioning wet thrust modular so that, say, a mechanic could eas- gines powering CTOL F-35As and F-35Cs, the at the pilot’s command. Also, like the F119 ily remove the electronics or valves or re- DGGLWLRQDOWXUELQHVWDJHRϑHUVDVXEVWDQWLDO augmentor, the F135 augmentor is stealthy: lays for an F135 fuel control unit as entire extra power margin, allowing for potential The design of the two engines’ augmentors modules…. F-35 weight growth. Since the engine isn’t places multi-zone fuel injection into curved …So seriously did P&W take the job of heavily taxed in many CTOL missions, its vanes which eliminate conventional spray making the F135 highly maintainable that maintainability is improved too…. EDUVDQGÀDPHKROGHUVDQGEORFNWKHOLQH it tried to design the engine to require only «3 :DOVRZRQ¶WFRQ¿UPWKHGU\ZHLJKW of sight to the turbine when looking into the a single hand tool, clamped to the engine of the F135, but a source commenting on an engine from behind. when not in use, for all line-maintenance 1 jobs. P&W couldn’t quite achieve that ideal ÀRZ from the LiftFan, as commanded by the are situated in the lower part of each inner but did succeed to the point where only six pilot through the aircraft’s FADEC units. wing section and act to provide roll con- hand tools are required…. When the F-35B is hovering, the drive- trol for the F-35B while it is in hover mode. shaft delivers 28,000 shaft horsepower to In order to do this, the roll-post ducts di- …The Rolls-Royce LiftSystem the LiftFan’s clutch-and-bevel-gear sys- rect bypass air from the engine to the roll One of the most remarkable features of the tem so that the LiftFan provides 20,000lb posts, which drive the air out through the F-35 programme is that when the STOVL (124.55kN) of downward thrust as a column bottom of each wing. In the F-35B, 3,700lb F-35B is hovering, its propulsion system of cool air. (In the F-35B’s hover mode the (16.46kN) of thrust in the form of bypass produces very nearly as much thrust with- coupled F135-driveshaft arrangement acts air is directed out to the two roll posts while out afterburner as the engine does in for- exactly like a turboprop engine, except that hovering. [Total 39,400lb of thrust] ZDUGÀLJKWZLWKLWVDIWHUEXUQHUIXOO\OLW7KH most of its power output is used to drive Each roll-post assembly features a pair F-35B’s engine has to produce 39,400lb air vertically rather than horizontally, so the RIÀDSW\SHGRRUVLQWKHERWWRPRIWKHZLQJ (176kN) of vertical thrust without after- F135 is actually the world’s most power- controlled by the FADEC. Jones says these burner in hover mode, while in conventional ful turboprop engine when installed in the titanium doors are controlled by rotary actu- ÀLJKWLWSURGXFHVOE N1 RIGU\ F-35B.) ators which allow fully variable opening, pro- thrust and 43,000lb [LM says 40,000lb] In hover mode another 15,700lb viding a degree of thrust variability and di- (191.27kN) with full afterburner. (69.84kN) of thrust exits the engine exhaust rectionality so that the pilot can control roll The F135-powered F-35B relies on two as hot gas and is directed downwards at the while hovering. He says Lockheed Martin’s systems to achieve the high level of verti- rear of the aircraft by the aircraft’s three- original X-35 concept demonstrator featured cal thrust. First is its full authority digital en- bearing swivel module (3BSM). This remark- doors between the engine casing and the gine control (FADEC) unit – computers made able piece of equipment consists of three ar- roll-post ducts which could be closed when by BAE Systems and attached to the en- ticulated sections of nozzle casing, each of the aircraft was not hovering, but in produc- gine, but running on Pratt & Whitney pro- which is made from titanium. Each section is tion aircraft there are no such doors and by- SULHWDU\)$'(&VRIWZDUH,QKRYHULQJÀLJKW joined to the other sections by and driven by SDVVDLUÀRZLVFRQVWDQWO\VHQWWRWKHGXFWV the FADEC computers make the engine work its own ring bearing. When the F-35B hovers, The only way to control roll-post thrust is via harder, allowing it to increase dry thrust the FADEC commands the 3BSM – which can WKHÀDSGRRUVLQWKHERWWRPRIWKHZLQJ from 28,000lb to 39,400lb without using direct air through a 95-degree range from The demand for very high power dur- afterburner…. 5° forward to horizontally back – to swiv- ing hover requires that the engine receive a …Below the LiftFan, the variable area el downwards to direct hot engine exhaust KLJKDPRXQWRIDLUÀRZVR/RFNKHHG0DUWLQ vane box (VAVB) provides an exit path for air in the same direction as the direction of designed the F-35B with a pair of auxiliary the cool air driven downwards vertical- the cool air produced by the LiftFan near the air inlet (AAI) doors in the upper surface of ly by the LiftFan. Rolls-Royce produces the front of the aircraft. The 3BSM can swivel the fuselage behind the big inlet door for the VAVB, which is made of aluminium and con- fully from horizontal to vertical orientation in LiftFan. These AAIs provide additional inlet tains louvred vane doors. These can be an- 2.5 seconds…. air for the F135 engine, not the LiftFan….” gled all the way from 45° back, through fully …According to Jones, the roll posts http://militaryrussia.ru/forum/ vertical to 5° forward to provide variable di- themselves are variable-area nozzles which rectionality for the downward cool-air GRZQORDG¿OHSKS"LG 2 JOURNAL OF AIRCRAFT The purpose of this paper is to describe how the technical and Vol. 46, No. 6, November–December 2009 2009 WRIGHT BROTHERS LECTURE program challenges involved in the creation of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter were met. It will show how multiple service and mission http:// requirementswereincorporatedintoasingleaircraftdesign.Analysis, Genesis of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter design, ground-test, and experimental flight-test information will be www.f-16. presented. The first section of this paper describes the conceptual Paul M. Bevilaqua design of the original STOVL Strike Fighter for the Marines. Its Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company, Palmdale, California 93599 net/forum/ development into the Air Force and Marine Common Strike Fighter will be discussed in the next section. The addition of the Navy and DOI: 10.2514/1.42903 overseas partners to create the International Joint Strike Fighter will Functional analysis has been used to design a common aircraft to replace the U.S. Air Force F-16s, Navy and download/ be described in the section after that. The last section summarizes Marine Corps F/A-18s, and Marine AV-8s. The technical and program challenges involved in developing a common the current status of the program and plans for the production and aircraft for all three services were met by designing three highly common, but not identical, variants of the same file.php? deployment of the F-35 Lightning II aircraft. aircraft. The key elements of this commonality are an innovative propulsion system that can be switched from a fl id=18966 turbofan cycle for conventional ight to a turboshaft cycle for vertical takeoff and landing and a basic structural Marine STOVL Strike Fighter arrangement that can accommodate the substitution of stronger parts in the Naval variant to absorb the greater In 1980, the Navy completed the Sea Based Air Master Study [1] takeoff and landing loads of carrier operations. Fig. 2 Evolution of VTOL aircraft. on the future of Naval aviation. An essential conclusion was that an http://pdf.aiaa.org/getfile.cfm?urlX=-%3CWI'7D%2FQKS%2B%2FRP%23IW%40%20%20%0A&urlb=!*0%20%20%0A&urlc=!*0%20%20%0A&urld=!*0%20%20%0A all-STOVL Naval air force designed around then-current tech- Introduction greeted with considerable skepticism, largely because the joint develop a VTOL aircraft. However, tailsitter aircraft had limited nologies would cost more than an equivalent conventional carrier- Tactical Fighter Experimental (TFX) program of the 1960s had not range/payload performance due to the weight limits imposed by based force. Given this result, the Navy began the construction of HE Wright Brothers Lectures commemorate Wilbur and Orville two new nuclear aircraft carriers. NASA took on the challenge of ’ fi succeeded as a joint program. The TFX program was intended to save vertical takeoff and no ability to increase lift off weight with a short T Wright s success in developing the rst practical airplane. But developing technologies for reducing the cost of supersonic STOVL in solving the problems of manned flight, they also demonstrated the several billions of dollars in life cycle costs by using a common ground roll when there was a runway available. In addition, tailsitters airframe and engines to meet both the Navy’s fleet air defense were difficult for pilots to land because they had minimal control aircraft and began the Advanced Short Take Off and VerticalLanding value of their approach to problem-solving. The key elements of their ’ fi (ASTOVL) program. Between 1980 and 1987, NASA funded studies approach were a skeptical study of the relevant literature, to identify requirement and the Air Force s requirement for a long-range ghter power in hover, and the pilot could not see over his shoulder to bomber. The Navy withdrew from the TFX program when the determine how high he was above the ground, or how fast he was at all of the major aircraft companies to devise innovative concepts for errors as well as valid data; innovative thinking, which led to the idea a supersonic successor to the AV-8B Harrier, and the British Ministry that an airplane can be controlled with wing warping; constructive aircraft became too heavy for carrier operations. The Air Force was descending. left with an F-111 too small to be an effective bomber and not of Defence conducted similar studies in the United Kingdom. debate, to work the flaws out of their ideas; systematic testing, Therefore, the second generation of VTOL aircraft, including the ’ maneuverable enough to be a competitive fighter. Mirage III-V and XV-4, were designed with lift engines installed Lockheed s ASTOVL concept was based on the tandem fan engine progressing from wind tunnels to kites to gliders to airplanes; and advocated by Rolls-Royce [2,3]. teamwork, including the contributions of their mechanic Charles In addition, developing a supersonic, vertical takeoff and landing vertically in the fuselage, so that the aircraft could take off and land in (VTOL) fighter was considered a significant technical challenge by The tandem fan engine would have been created by lengthening Taylor, who actually implemented many of their ideas. Lockheed a conventional horizontal attitude. This enabled the pilot to see the fi itself. The stages in the evolution of VTOL aircraft are illustrated in a cruise engine to move the rst stage of the engine fan forward. Martin used a similar approach in developing the Joint Strike Fighter ground and judge his sink rate. However, the lift engines took up too fi Fig. 2. The first attempts to build a vertical takeoff and landing fighter much space in the fuselage and were dead weight during cruise, In the STOVL cycle, the rst stage of the engine fan was to have been (JSF), and so the subject of this paper seems appropriate for a lecture converted to a lift fan by diverting its exhaust flow to nozzles at the commemorating their accomplishments, and it is an honor to have were the tailsitters of the 1950s, including the XFV-1,the XFY-1,and whereas the cruise engines were dead weight during hover. As a the X-13. Because the thrust-to-weight ratio of fighter aircraft was result, the range/payload performance of these aircraft was also front of the aircraft. An auxiliary inlet would be opened to provide air been invited to present it. to the engine core. By moving some of the cruise thrust forward in the The U.S. Air Force F-16 Falcon, U.S. Marine Corps AV-8B already close to 1, designers thought that it would be a simple matter unsatisfactory. In addition, the hot exhaust gases of the lift engines of standing a fighter on its tail and increasing the thrust a little to damaged the airframe and caused ground erosion, and reingestion of vertical mode, this innovative engine concept enabled designers to Harrier, and U.S. Navy F/A-18 Hornet, shown in Fig. 1, are fourth- balance the airplane while hovering. However, diverting the flow of fi these hot gases caused the lift engines to stall and lose lift. generation strike ghters. They will all need to be replaced with new the front fan from the engine core meant the loss of its supercharging aircraft at about the same time, beginning in the next decade. Before The third generation of VTOL aircraft, such as the VJ-101, used fl swiveling lift/cruise engines that were rotated from a vertical position effect on the core ow. Therefore, the tandem fan engine produced the end of the Cold War, each of the services had begun programs slightly less thrust in thevertical cycle than in the cruise cycle, despite to develop fifth-generation replacement aircraft. Fifth-generation for hover to a horizontal position for cruise. However, these air- fi fl the increased mass flow. As a result, the tandem fan engine had to be successor aircraft will incorporate stealth, operate in a net-centric craft were dif cult to transition from hover to cruise ight, or back, and they also suffered from hot-gas ingestion and ground-erosion sized for the hover thrust requirement. This made it somewhat environment, and have greater range. However, it soon became oversized for cruise, which increased fuel consumption. Also, the lift apparent that there would not be enough money in the reduced problems. Further, because the engines had to be sized for hover, they fi fan did not develop sufficient thrust to balance the thrust from the defense budget to fund three separate replacement aircraft programs. were larger than optimal for cruise. The resulting inef ciencies reduced range/payload performance. cruise nozzle, and so the engine had to be moved forward over the A common replacement aircraft was an attractive solution that center of gravity of the aircraft. This concentration of wing, fuel, appealed to some in government and industry. In the latest and most successful generation of VTOL aircraft, the fi thrust of the cruise engine is simply vectored down. The AV-8 uses payload, and engine volume at the center of gravity made it dif cult However, the idea that multiple service and mission requirements to design an aircraft that was slender enough to achieve supersonic could be incorporated into a single aircraft design was initially thrust vectoring of a single lift/cruise engine with a high bypass Fig. 1 Fourth-generation strike fighter aircraft. ratio having enough thrust for vertical landing. In routine operations, speeds. it is flown from any available runway as a short takeoff and vertical When these airframe studies were completed in the summer of landing aircraft. With a short takeoff run, the AV-8 has range/payload 1986,aU.S./U.K.governmentreviewpanelconcludedthatnoneofthe proposed concepts offered a clear advantage in cost or performance. Paul M. Bevilaqua is an Aeronautical Engineer at the Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company. He earned a B.S. in performance comparable with other lightweight fighters. However, However, the panel did identify four propulsion concepts, including aerospace engineering from the University of Notre Dame. After receiving a Ph.D. from Purdue University for his the fan diameter is too large to enable the aircraft to achieve super- the tandem fan, which seemed promising. They recommended contributions to the theory of shear flow turbulence, he served on active duty as a U.S. Air Force officer assigned to the sonic speeds. The VAK 191 and Yak 38 were hybrid concepts that developingtechnologies thatwouldimprovetheperformanceofthese Aerospace Research Laboratories at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base. He used his understanding of turbulence to vectored the thrust of the cruise engine, but also incorporated lift four concepts, and this work continued until 1991. develop hypermixing nozzles and ejectors for a U.S. Air Force VSTOL (vertical short takeoff and landing) transport engines to increase thrust for hover. In these aircraft, the engines also aircraft. Following his military service, he became Manager of Advanced Programs at Rockwell International’s U.S. took up internal volume and created hot-gas ingestion and ground- Navy aircraft plant, where he led the design of U.S. Navy VSTOL interceptor and transport aircraft. He subsequently erosion problems. Invention of the Dual-Cycle Propulsion System joined Lockheed Martin as Chief Aeronautical Scientist of the Lockheed Advanced Aeronautics Company and Although the short takeoff and vertical landing (STOVL) AV-8and At the same time, NASA was also working with the Lockheed became Chief Engineer of Advanced Development Projects in the Lockheed Martin Skunk Works®. He played a Yak-38 were operational aircraft, they were not capable of supersonic Skunk Works to study the installation of lift engines in the F-117, leading role in creating the Joint Strike Fighter program. He invented the Lift Fan Propulsion System that made it speeds. The fundamental problem was that a propulsion system that to identify the technologies needed to build a stealthy STOVL possible to build a stealthy supersonic VSTOL Strike Fighter, and he proposed designs for conventional and Naval provided enough thrust for hover was too large and required too much Strike Fighter (SSF). In the fall of 1986, the Defense Advanced variants, to share development costs between the U.S. Air Force, U.S. Navy, and U.S. Marine Corps. He subsequently fuel to enable the design of a slender supersonic airframe. During Research Projects Agency (DARPA) expanded the scope of the led the engineering team that demonstrated the feasibility of building short takeoff and vertical landing, the 1970s, in the decade before the start of the Joint Strike Fighter NASA studies when it awarded the Skunk Works a nine-month-long conventional, and Naval variants of this aircraft. program, both the VAK 191 and XFV-12A supersonic demonstrator exploratory study contract to see if a supersonic stealthy SSF could aircraft were unsuccessful, and neither became operational. To be developed for the Marines. This aircraft would have to perform fi Presented as Paper 1650 at the 47th Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Orlando, FL, 5–8 January 2009; received 23 December 2008; accepted for publication 2 July summarize, the development of VTOL ghter aircraft proceeded the air superiority missions of the F/A-18 as well as the close air 2009. Copyright © 2009 by Lockheed Martin Corporation. Published by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc., with permission. Copies of along a path to simplification: first the aircraft were tilted, then the support missions of the AV-8. This combination of supersonic and this paper may be made for personal or internal use, on condition that the copier pay the $10.00 per-copy fee to the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood engines were tilted, then the engines werevectored, until it was finally vertical performance requirements meant that the engine must not Drive, Danvers, MA 01923; include the code 0021-8669/09 and $10.00 in correspondence with the CCC. recognized that the only thing that had to be vectored was the thrust. only provide enough vertical thrust for short takeoffs and vertical landings, but must also be small enough that it would not increase When the lift fan was disengaged for cruise, the bypass flow would occurs across the turbine nozzles, increasing the thrust of the jets T V2A (3) supersonic drag. The propulsion system would be the key component be returned to the cruise nozzle. This would match the nozzle area to from the turbine nozzles and producing more shaft horsepower, in the development of this new strike fighter. the cruise power requirement again. In fact, it would not be necessary while reducing the thrust of the exhaust flow. In general, the effect of where is the air density and A is the fan area. Ideally, a VTOL aircraft has a thrust-to-weight ratio of about 1.2 to to add another turbine stage. The existing turbine would move off its opening the exhaust nozzle is to decrease its thrust while increasing Solving this thrust equation for velocity and substituting in Eq. (2) provide thrust margins for vertical acceleration and control. A design operating point to provide shaft power for hover and back to the thrust of the turbine nozzles. yields horsepower as a function of thrust for cylindrical ducted fans: conventional F/A-18 has a usual takeoff weight of around 37,000 lb its design operating point for cruise. The existing driveshaft for the The power produced by the turbine section of a turbojet engine is and dry thrust of 22,000 lb, giving a thrust-to-weight ratio of only engine fan could just be lengthened to power the lift fan. given by the equation hp T3= A1=2 (4) 0.60 in dry power, increasing to just 0.95 in afterburner. AVTOL F/ Because the lift fan is not connected to the engine during cruise A-18 would require about 44,000 lb of dry thrust (1:2 37; 000 lb). flight, the engine operates like a conventional mixed-flow turbofan g1=g As previously noted, the lift fan must develop approximately turbine power mc_ T041 P5=P4 (1) Comparing a conventional F/A-18 with a VTOL F/A-18 illustrates engine during cruise. For STOVL operations, the lift fan is connected p 22,000 lb of thrust to balance an aircraft the size of an F/A-18. If the the basic problem: there is not enough thrust, and it is all at the back. to the cruise engine by engaging a clutch on the driveshaft. The cruise lift fan has the same 4 ft diameter as the cruise engine, then approxi- _ fl fi AVTOL F/A-18 requires an additional 22,000 lb of dry thrust ahead engine nozzle is simultaneously opened, increasing the pressure drop where m is the mass ow through the turbine, cp is the speci c heat at mately 30,000 shp will be required, according to Eq. (4). To the of the center of gravity for balance and to provide the necessary thrust across the engine’s turbine section. This causes it to extract additional constant pressure per unit mass of air, g is the gas constant, T04 is the accuracy of this analysis, there is sufficient power available from margin. The problem became devising a way to double the engine shaft power, which is used to drive the lift fan. The engine then stagnation temperature of the gas entering the turbine section, and the engine to drive the lift fan. thrust and move half of it to the front of the airplane. Posing the operates in hover like a separate-flow turbofan with a higher bypass P5=P4 is the pressure ratio across the turbine section. The usual This power must be transmitted by the driveshaft. The horsepower problem this way turned out to be the key to the solution. ratio. This dual-cycle operation is the novel feature of the engine in method of increasing turbine power is by increasing the fuel flow, transmitted by a driveshaft is equal to the product of torque and Skunk Works engineers tried a number of brainstorming tech- the F-35 [5]. which increases T04. The additional power of the turbine accelerates rotational velocity. Therefore, for a given horsepower transmitted, niques, but the one that proved most useful was the method of forced To summarize, the solution was to extract some of the energy from the engine until the power absorbed by the compressor matches the the necessary torque decreases as the rotational velocity of the shaft associations. This is a technique for inventing something new by the engine exhaust jet by changing the operating point of the turbine, power produced by the turbine and the engine speed stabilizes. increases. The shaft must be sized to transmit this torque. The torsion generating arbitrary combinations of existing mechanisms. The move it forward with a shaft, and turn it into additional thrust by Because the rotational speed of the engine has increased, the engine formula for hollow round shafts gives, for the diameter of the shaft, technique required making a list of all the ways to extract power from adding it to a larger mass flow of air with a fan. The lift fan is attached pumps more air and produces more thrust. the hot high-pressure exhaust gases at the back of the engine (for to a driveshaft extending from the front of the cruise engine, as shown The performance map of the turbine section in a typical modern d 16 shp= ! 1 f41=3 (5) example, turbines, scoops, heat pipes, magnetohydrodynamics, etc.), in Fig. 3, and bypass air for the roll jets is tapped off from behind the fighter engine is shown in Fig. 5. The locus of steady-state matching making another list of all of the ways to transfer power from one cruise engine fan. Thinking about how to extract power from the back conditions defines the engine operating line, which is the diagonal where ! is the rotational speed of the shaft, is the maximum unit point in the aircraft to another (gas ducts, driveshafts, chain drives, of the airplane and transfer it to the front resulted in a flash of insight running from the bottom left to the top right in the figure. The engine shear stress of the driveshaft material, and f is the fraction of the shaft superconducting wires, energy beams, etc.), and making a third list that produced the dual-cycle-engine concept as the solution for the and compressor are designed so that the turbine power and com- diameter that is hollow. This formula gives the stress due to torsion of all the ways to use power to generate thrust (fans, pulse jets, STOVL Strike Fighter. pressor power match near the point of maximum efficiency at every only; it neglects other loads, such as those due to bending and explosions, piezoelectric pumps, etc.). The procedure is to arbitrarily speed. However, at maximum thrust, the turbine inlet temperature T04 vibration. Figure 6 shows how the diameter of a 0.05 thin-walled pick one mechanism from each list and figure out how they might be is already at the material limit of the turbine section. As a result, the aluminum shaft transmitting 30,000 hp varies with engine rpm due to made to work together to solve the problem. This technique led to Principle of Operation gas temperature cannot be increased to provide the power to drive the torsion loads. The high rotational speeds typical of jet engines, the invention of some truly innovative concepts: for example, using To appreciate how this dual-cycle engine turns jet thrust into the lift fan. Instead, during VTOL operation, the additional power more than 10,000 rpm, make it possible to transmit large amounts of the energy of the exhaust gas to pump a gas laser, then beaming the additional shaft power, it is necessary to consider the changes in the to drive the lift fan is obtained by increasing the pressure drop across power with an aluminum shaft just a few inches in diameter. fl energy forward, and then using it to explode the air in a pulse jet static pressure of the air as it ows through the engine. The variation the turbine section, P4–P5. The additional power is shown by the two The size of the clutch depends on both the rotational kinetic energy engine. of total energy (top) and static pressure (middle) through an engine points in Fig. 5. of the fan, I!2=2, and the period of engagement, t. The horsepower But none of these concepts were really practical. It became are shown in Fig. 4. The pressure rises through the compressor (2–3), The lower point is on the conventional operating line, and the that must be absorbed by the clutch during engagement decreases as apparent that the best way to extract power from hot high-pressure remains constant through the combustor (3–4), and then drops upper point is obtained when the pressure drop across the turbine is the time for engagement is increased according to the relation exhaust gas is with a turbine, the best way to get the power forward in through the turbine section (4–5) and nozzle (5–6), in two steps. As increased. In this case, nearly 30,000 hp can be extracted before the 2 an aircraft is with a driveshaft (it is light and does not increase the the pressure drops through the turbine section, the flow accelerates. turbine section reaches its stall limit. There is enough residual power hp I! =2t (6) cross-sectional area of the fuselage), and the best way to produce The resulting thrust of the jets from the turbine nozzles spins the in the exhaust flow to generate significant thrust from the cruise vertical thrust is with a fan (increasing mass flow is the best way to turbine disk that powers the driveshaft. nozzle during hover. Engaging the clutch while increasing the nozzle The knee of this curve is near 10 s at low engine speeds. increase thrust per horsepower). At every engine speed, the static pressure at the inlet to the turbine area transfers the additional power to the lift fan, so that the speed of The jet pressure ratio can also be estimated from the thrust Therefore, the best solution to the problem of producing thrust section is equal to the pressure rise across the compressor. The the engine does not increase. equation. Because the static pressure in the lift jet returns to ambient – ahead of the center of gravity would be to add another turbine stage to pressure drop across the turbine (P4 P5) plus the pressure drop pressure behind the fan, then – extract power from the exhaust gases. It would have to be variable- across the exhaust nozzle (P5 P6) must therefore equal the pressure rise across the compressor (P3 P2). The distribution of the pressure 1 2 pitch, so that it could be feathered during cruise. Another driveshaft Analytical Estimates 2 V Ptotal Patmospheric (7) drops is controlled by the engine exhaust nozzle. Increasing the could be run from the added turbine stage through the engine to a lift The horsepower needed to drive a lift fan can be estimated using fan: Rolls-Royce was already building three spool engines. The lift exhaust nozzle exit area reduces the pressure drop across the exhaust – basic momentum-energy considerations: horsepower hp is the This equation can be solved for the fan pressure ratio PR fan provides one lift post. Vectoring the cruise nozzle down would nozzle (P5 P6), and so the pressure drop across the turbine nozzles – product of thrust T and velocity V: Ptotal=Patmospheric and yields create another lift post. Shifting power between the lift fan and cruise (P4 P5) must increase to compensate. nozzle would provide control in pitch. Similarly, engine bypass air For example, increasing the nozzle exit area so that A6 A5,as PR 1 1 2 hp 2 V =Patmospheric (8) could be ducted off to nozzles in the wings and thrust could be shifted sketched in Fig. 4, causes the static pressure at the turbine exit, P5,to TV (2) from one wing to the other to provide roll control. drop to atmospheric pressure, P6. The entire pressure drop then But ducting off the bypass air would effectively increase the nozzle and thrust is the product of mass flow and velocity. If the duct of the fl 25 exit area for the core ow and lower the back pressure on the turbine lift fan is assumed to be cylindrical, so that the exit area of the duct section. That would increase the power produced by the turbine [4], equals the fan area, then thrust equals so that it would be necessary to close the cruise nozzle down to keep the engine from over speeding. On the other hand, if the lift fan was 20 connected to the turbine at the same time that the bypass air was diverted to the wings, the lift fan would absorb the extra turbine 15 power and keep the engine from speeding up. Then varying the Shaft nozzle area would shift power back and forth for pitch control. Diameter (inches) 10 5 0 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 Shaft Speed (rpm) Fig. 3 Shaft-driven lift fan propulsion system. Fig. 4 Variation of pressure through a turbojet. Fig. 5 Turbine performance map. Fig. 6 Driveshaft diameter depends on rpm. DLI CAP CAS Super Transonic Subsonic Climb Acceleration Acceleration Loiter Agility Ride cruise Maneuver Maneuver Maneuver G’s High High Low High High Survivability Sweep W/b T/W W/S Sweep Fig. 7 Original sketch of the JSF propulsion system. where Patmospheric is the ambient atmospheric pressure. Solving the thrust equation for the dynamic pressure at the fan face gives, for the dynamic pressure, High Low Low Low T/W W/S W/b Sweep 1=2 V2 T=2A (9) Fig. 11 Functional analysis was used to flow requirements down to the aircraft design. Therefore, for a 4 ft lift fan developing 22,000 lb of thrust, the Speed pressure ratio is approximately 1.4, which is about the same as the Fig. 9 Achieving survivability with speed and maneuver. This was a new way of designing an aircraft and it required a different design point was selected at the knee of the curve, at the 80/20 point, pressure ratio of the lift jets of the AV-8 Harrier. approach to trade studies. which was judged to give the best value. This resulted in an aircraft This first-order analysis suggested that it might be possible to only a couple of dozen people at each of the participating companies Skunk Works engineers used functional analysis to systematically with about the same performance as an F-18C, but which was almost double the thrust of an existing F-119 engine with a dual- worked on these contracts. analyze the conflicting performance requirements of the design more survivable because it was stealthier and capable of extended cycle shaft-driven lift fan the same diameter as the engine. Such a There were three design missions: Close Air Support, Combat missions and then used constraint analysis and tactical air combat supersonic cruise. However, it was necessary to project a 15% weight variable-cycle propulsion system would provide high levels of Air Patrol, and Deck Launched Intercept. However, there were no simulations to devise the most cost-effective combination of aircraft savings through the use of composites to achieve the required weight thrust augmentation in the STOVL mode, with a cool low-pressure specified speed, maneuver, signature, or other requirements. The capabilities. Functional analysis is a technique for deriving aircraft of 24,000 lb. footprint, ample control power, and minimal effect on the design of only explicit requirement was that the empty weight of the aircraft be design features from mission requirements. Each of the required Although the aircraft in the initial sketch shown to DARPA the airframe. By placing the lift fan in line with the cruise engine, the less than 24,000 lb, which is about 5% more than the empty weight of missions is subdivided into mission segments. Then each mission resembled an F-117, highly swept wings produce an unstable pitch bypass ratio would be increased without increasing the engine an F/A-18C. In other words, the weight of the STOVL equipment segment is decomposed into functions that the aircraft must per- up, even at moderate angles of attack, and were quickly abandoned. diameter. And because the cruise engine can be optimized for was to be about the same as the typical weight increment for the form to accomplish that segment. Finally, each function is analyzed The initial design of the STOVL Strike Fighter had a delta/canard conventional flight, its performance is not penalized for its STOVL navalization of a conventional aircraft. to determine the specific design features needed to perform the planform, as shown in Fig. 13. The active canard was moved like capability. This use of weight as an independent variable was a novel program function. This flowchart is often called a Willoughby template [7]. A a weather vane during subsonic cruise and maneuver, so that it management tool used by DARPA to control the cost of the SSF. In simplified version of this analysis is shown in Fig. 11. It highlights provided no lift and little drag, but it was adjusted to provide lift for DARPA Conceptual Design Contract Awards the past, the Pentagon would release a set of specific performance the conflicting requirements for wing loading, thrust loading, span trimming the nose-down moments that were produced when the flaps To illustrate the installation of such a propulsion system in a requirements. The airframe contractors would then design the loading, and sweep. were deflected and when the center of lift moved aft at supersonic supersonic SSF, an airframe resembling an F-117 without facets was lightest and therefore most affordable airplane that would meet all of Constraint analysis was used to select compromise values for these speeds. The active canard has less trim drag than a horizontal tail [8]. sketched for DARPA. The airframe was not faceted because these requirements. Figure 8 is a typical carpet plot showing the design parameters. Figure 12 shows the sensitivity of the design point The desired performance required an afterburning engine. Because computational speeds had increased in the decade since the F-117 effect of speed and maneuverability on weight. In this case, weight is to varying the speed and maneuver constraints that drove the design. the jet flap nozzles could not accommodate an afterburner, the jet was designed, so that it was now possible to analyze smooth the dependent variable; it depends on the specified M 1:5 speed The design point is above the speed and sustained maneuver flap was similarly abandoned. The aircraft carried two long-range contours. In this original sketch, shown in Fig. 7, the axis of the lift and the specified 7.5 g maneuver. Of course, weight also depends on constraint lines and to the left of the instantaneous maneuver AIM 120 missiles and two short-range AIM 9 missiles in internal fan was aligned with the axis of the cruise engine, and rotating signature, range, payload, etc., which are other dimensions of the constraint lines. The design point was selected by balancing the cost weapons bays. Models of the aircraft were tested in the wind tunnel nozzles such as those on the Harrier were used to vector the fan thrust. carpet plot. of improving performance against the cost of increasing combat and on the radar range to verify the predictions of both the aero- The core thrust of the supercruising engine was vectored over a jet However, there are often several ways to meet a top-level mission losses if performance was not improved. dynamic forces and the radar cross section. flap [6]. requirement. For example, the same level of combat survivability can The cost savings obtained by improving all of the performance Paul Shumpert, the Skunk Works’ lead propulsion engineer, used DARPA was interested in pursuing the concept further. In be achieved with different combinations of aircraft speed and parameters fell on curves of diminishing returns, similar to those in the software engine simulator provided by Pratt and Whitney (P&W) January 1988, it awarded the Skunk Works a follow-on contract to maneuverability, as illustrated schematically in Fig. 9. Specifying a Fig. 9, which meant that 80% of the optimum performance could be to show that dual-cycle operation of the Advanced Tactical Fighter develop the conceptual design of an aircraft incorporating this 24,000 lb empty weight limit, shown in Fig. 10, was intended to obtained for 20% of what the optimum cost. In other words, the last engine was feasible and that sufficient power could be extracted to dual-cycle propulsion system; McDonnell Douglas and General enable the designers to propose the most effective combination of 20% of performance drove 80% of the costs. Therefore, the initial drive the lift fan. Both Pratt and Whitney and General Electric (GE) Dynamics were given similar contracts to design stealthy versions of speed, maneuver, signature, etc., for an aircraft of specified cost, their ASTOVL aircraft concepts. These were not major programs; without having to get government approval to change requirements. 1.4 1.2 Mach 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.0 0.8 Sustained G's Ratio 6 0.6 Thrust / Weight Thrust / 5 0.4 4 Instantaneous G's 9 8 7 0.2 0.0 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Wing Loading Fig. 8 Weight as a dependent variable. Fig. 10 Weight as an independent variable. Fig. 12 Constraints that determined the design point. Fig. 13 First STOVL Strike Fighter design iteration. then worked with Skunk Works engineers to optimize their to secure funding for the SSF technology maturation and risk- industry in August 1992 for conducting critical technology demon- Advanced Tactical Fighter engine cycles to power a lift fan. The lift reduction effort. This led Gerry Cann, the Assistant Secretary of the strations of shaft-driven and gas-driven lift fan systems and for fan was installed with its axis vertical, because this maximized hover Navy for Research, Development, and Acquisition, to task the Naval the conceptual design of what was called the Common Affordable thrust. The Allison Engine Company designed an innovative lift fan Research Advisory Committee (NRAC) in early 1992 with assessing Lightweight Fighter (CALF). The RFP requested proposals for other with two counter-rotating fan stages. This configuration directs half the feasibility and desirability of developing a STOVL Strike Fighter. novel lift systems as well. Because this was the first public disclosure of the power to each stage of the fan system, which reduces the gear of the DARPA program, some consider this RFP to be the start of the loads in half. With this system, the power through each gear set is JSF program. similar to that used in current heavy-lift helicopters. Beginnings of Jointness Allison also designed a similarly innovative two-stage clutch to In April 1992, Brig. Gen. George Muellner, who was then Deputy connect the lift fan to its driveshaft. A multidisk friction clutch is used Chief of Staff for Requirements at Air Combat Command, visited the DARPA Technology Demonstration and Maturation Contracts to reduce the shock of engagement by slipping while the lift fan is Skunk Works to review recent developments. The STOVL Strike General Electric’s proposal to the Skunk Works for demonstrating accelerated from rest to the engine speed. Once the speed of the lift Fighter was put on the agenda. However, the Air Force was not likely the dual-cycle propulsion system was $5 million less than P&W’s fan matches the engine speed, a mechanical lockup is engaged. This to be interested in a STOVL aircraft, because it had less need for such proposal, and all the other aircraft companies gave subcontracts to transmits the full power required for short takeoff or vertical landing. capabilities than the Navy and it had similar concerns about the GE. However, the Skunk Works chose P&W because the Air Force However, because the dual-cycle propulsion system concept was increased cost. In fact, the Air Force had begun thinking about a had selected the P&W engine over the GE engine for the F-22 Fig. 15 Revised STOVL and conventional Strike Fighter variants. new and unproven, Skunk Works engineers also designed a variant of conventional takeoff and landing (CTOL) MultiRole Fighter (MRF) program and it would be the only engine available when our this aircraft with a gas-driven lift fan, as a fallback option. In the to replace the F-16, although this program had no funding. Therefore, demonstrator aircraft would need an engine. In exchange, P&W and forth for pitch control by synchronizing the operation of the lift gas-driven variant, some of the engine exhaust gases were ducted it was decided to brief Gen. Muellner on a stealthy conventional agreed to work exclusively with the Skunk Works on the develop- fan with the changes in engine nozzle area. And there were also forward, around the engine, and used to spin a turbine that drove the takeoff and landing strike fighter, instead. One of the secrets of the ment of the dual-cycle shaft-driven lift fan concept. Since the shaft- questions about the weight and reliability of the driveshaft, clutch, lift fan, something like a turbocharger. This variant did not develop as Skunk Works is that it was not necessary to deal with miles of red tape driven lift fan concept had been invented under DARPA contract, the and gearbox that powered the lift fan. much vertical lift, required more internal volume for the gas ducts, and endless approval chains to make this decision. Ben Rich system was actually available to any American aircraft company for The demonstrator propulsion system was built and tested to and was therefore heavier and slower than the shaft-driven variant. described this Skunk Works management philosophy in his 1988 government programs and McDonnell Douglas proposed that they address these concerns and prove the feasibility of the dual-cycle However, it appeared that it would be a satisfactory supersonic Wright Brothers Lecture [10]. perform an “apples to apples” comparison of both the shaft-driven engine and drive system. The demonstrator engine and lift fan were successor to the Harrier and it might be less expensive to develop than The conventional variant was quickly created by simply and gas-driven lift fan systems for $60 million. However, in March constructed, like a hot rod, with components from existing engines. the shaft-driven system because it did not require modifying the removing the lift fan and vectoring nozzle from the SSF and 1993 the Skunk Works was awarded a $33 million contract to mature The first-stage fan and inlet guide vanes from the Pratt & Whitney cruise engine. substituting a fuel tank and a more conventional cruise nozzle. technologies for a shaft-driven lift fan and McDonnell Douglas YF119 engine were used for the lift fan. This fan ran at the same This reduced the empty weight of the aircraft by about 15%, while received a $28 million contract for a gas-driven lift fan. power level as one stage of the production lift fan, so that the loading DARPA Naval Study Contract Awards improving its range and reducing its cost. The weight of the fuel A year later, in March 1994, the U.S. Congress appropriated an on the drive gears was the same as in the production gearbox. The In the fall of 1989, DARPA arranged for all three contractors tank and one-half of a tank of fuel turned out to be about the same as additional $6 million to study designs based on a lift/cruise engine demonstrator engine was assembled by joining the fan and core to present their concepts to the Naval Air Systems Command the weight of the lift fan. As a result, both variants had the same concept, which was considered to have less risk because it had of the relatively-low-bypass-ratio P&W F100-PW-220 engine to the (NAVAIR). All three subsequently received follow-on contracts to midmission maneuver performance. The canard was to be used for been shown to be successful in the AV-8 Harrier. The Boeing turbine section from the higher-bypass-ratio F100-PW-229 engine. refine their designs and investigate the feasibility of using stealth in trim at other points in the mission, as the fuel was burned. These Company agreed to match that amount with its own funds and This bigger turbine could provide enough power to drive the lift fan the Naval environment. These studies were completed by the end of aircraft are shown in Fig. 14. received a DARPA contract to design a lift/cruise engine concept. as well as the engine fan. Two holes were cut in the engine case so 1990. After reviewing the results, the Marines expressed interest in At the end of the presentation on the conventional aircraft, Gen. The following year, the U.S. Congress appropriated an additional that the bypass air could be diverted to the pair of roll control jets, and fi conducting a technology maturation effort that would enable them to Muellner was briefed on the Marine STOVL variant and it was $10 million for the lift/cruise concept, which was again matched by the engine fan rotor was modi ed so that the driveshaft could be fl choose between the shaft-driven and gas-drivenvariants of the lift fan suggested that developing a Common Strike Fighter might be an Boeing. attached. Avariable-area thrust-de ecting nozzle was mounted at the system. This prompted the Skunk Works to apply for a patent on the affordable way for both services to get the aircraft they wanted. All three contractors were required to design both operational and rear of the engine, and the digital engine control software was fl fi shaft-driven lift fan and dual-cycle engine concept. The patent was Because the Navy, Marines, and Air Force had all own the F-4 demonstrator aircraft and to perform large-scale powered-model modi ed to run in both cruise and STOVL cycles. awarded three years later [9]. Phantom II, a joint program had previously been successful, despite demonstrations to reduce risk. These tests were intended to validate In December 1994, the assembled lift fan, gearbox, and driveshaft However, in December 1990, then Defense Secretary Cheney the F-111 experience. It seemed to me that if we built it, they would the propulsion concepts, to show that hot-gas ingestion would not be were demonstrated at the Allison facility in Indianapolis, Indiana. fi canceled the Marine’s V-22 program for the second time. The come, to paraphrase the movies. General Muellner requested follow- a problem, and to demonstrate that there was suf cient control power The power transmission losses in the gear set were measured, and fi Marines explained that they were a small service and could only on brie ngs by the Skunk Works to his staff at Langley Air Force for transition from hover to cruise. Large models were used due to operation of the lubrication and oil cooling system in the vertical support one aircraft development program at a time, and they had to Base. Then he met privately with DARPA and the Marines in the uncertainties about scaling the temperature and turbulence effects of position were demonstrated. The distortion limits of the fan were fi focus on the V-22. A few weeks later, in January 1991, Cheney Pentagon. DARPA then arranged brie ngs for Gen. McPeak, the Air the lift jets from small models. The Skunk Works created a new SSF established and the ability of the inlet guide vanes to modulate the fan terminated the troubled A-12 program for default, and the Secretary Force Chief of Staff; Adm. Dunleavy, the Assistant Chief of Naval baseline. This was nominally the same as the original SSF design, thrust was shown. The success of these demonstrations showed the fi fi fl of the Navy directed NAVAIR to begin work on the A/F-X, a new Operations for Air Warfare; and the Of ce of the Secretary of a delta canard con guration with a vertical lift fan and internal feasibility of building a ight-weight lift fan and gearbox for the stealth aircraft intended to replace the A-6. Most members of the Defense (OSD), who then advanced the idea to the service weapons bays. However, the aerodynamic performance estimates required power levels. Lockheed SSF design team were then reassigned to the A/F-X secretaries. In the summer of 1992, the NRAC endorsed the fea- were supported by data from the F-22 program [11]. The principal The lift fan was then shipped to the P&W facility in West Palm fi program. sibility of the SSF and recommended that the Navy work with the Air differences from the F-22 con guration were that the SSF design had Beach, Florida. During February 1995, it was connected to the Force to support the development of designs and technologies for a single engine and a canard. demonstrator engine and operated in both cruise and STOVL cycles, highly common Air Force and Marine MultiRole Strike Fighters. The addition of four new ground-attack missions from the MRF which demonstrated that an engine turbine could be switched from Common Affordable Lightweight Fighter With the support of OSD and the Pentagon, Congress appropriated program changed the design emphasis from a fighter with some strike providing jet thrust to providing shaft power to run the lift fan. The During 1991, DARPA and the Skunk Works continued to brief the $65 million for DARPA to begin a joint STOVL/CTOL Strike capability to a strike aircraft with some air-to-air defensive capability. ability to rapidly transfer thrust back and forth from the cruise engine Pentagon and the staffs of the U.S. Congressional budget committees Fighter program. DARPA released a Request for Proposal (RFP) to The development of stealth and long-range air-to-air missiles had to the lift fan to provide pitch control was also shown. changed the nature of air combat, and so the emphasis was on When these tests were complete, the propulsion system was achieving a first-look, first-kill capability and reducing the need to installed in a full-size airframe model made of fiberglass and steel. dogfight at close range. For these reasons, the two AIM 9 missiles This model is shown in Fig. 16. This model was mounted in the were removed and the aircraft was designed to carry two 2000 lb outdoor hover test facility at the NASA Ames Research Center. The bombs in the internal weapons bays, in addition to the two AIM 120 jet-induced downloads out of ground effect were measured to be less missiles. This increased the aircraft’s frontal area and wave drag. The than 3% of the jet thrust, and the jet fountain and lift improvement Air Force variant was derived, as before, by removing the lift fan and devices were shown to be successful in limiting the induced thrust-vectoring nozzles and substituting a fuel tank and conven- downloads to less than 7% at wheel height. These are very low tional cruise nozzle. These aircraft are shown in Fig. 15. numbers. No hot-gas ingestion was detected over a wide range of Although analysis and computer simulation had shown that it was pitch and roll angles while the aircraft model was suspended 1 ft off theoretically possible to extract enough energy from the exhaust of the ground. the F-119 engine to drive the lift fan, there were practical concerns The transition characteristics of the model were then measured in regarding the operation of such a dual-cycle propulsion system. In the NASA 80 120 ftwind tunnel. Drag polars obtained for a range particular, there were concerns about the thrust losses associated with of flap angles and tunnel speeds were used to show that the aircraft the large swirl angles induced in the engine exhaust flow when the could take off and land on a Wasp-class assault carrier with a 20 kt turbine operating point was changed. There were other questions wind over the deck without using a catapult or arresting gear and that Fig. 14 Conventional and STOVL Strike Fighter variants. about the ability of the engine controls to rapidly transfer thrust back it would have a wide corridor for transition from hover to wingborne programs and to develop technologies for a Joint Attack Fighter that changing the basic structural arrangement. For example, on the Air secretaries in February 1996, John White approved the plan to would replace the AV-8, F-16, and F-18 when they were retired Force and Marine variants, the bulkhead that takes the main landing develop a Joint Strike Fighter. A month later, before the tests of the 1 in fi beginning in 2010. This effort was called the Joint Advanced Strike gear load is made of aluminum and is approximately 2 : thick. The large-scale aircraft models were completed, the JAST program of ce Technology program. General Muellner was appointed the JAST same bulkhead on the Naval variant is made of titanium and is about released an RFP to industry for the design and flight test of the fi 3 in director in December 1993. The rst JAST concept-exploration 4 : thick. This technique was adapted from the F-16 production demonstrator aircraft. The proposals were submitted in June of that contracts were awarded in May 1994, more than a year into the line, in which cousin parts were used to create variants of the same year. The contractors were to propose their own demonstration test DARPA program. The JAST studies did not initially include a basic airframe for different customers who preferred different objectives. Lockheed Martin proposed three principle objectives: Marine STOVL variant, pending the results of the DARPA subsystems. first, to demonstrate that it is possible to build highly common demonstrations that were expected about October 1995 [16]. Because the shaft-driven lift fan propulsion concept was new and CTOL, STOVL, and Naval variants of a Joint Strike Fighter; second, However, in October 1994, the U.S. Congress directed that therefore considered the riskiest of the alternative propulsion to demonstrate STOVL performance and supersonic speed on the the DARPA program (and, specifically, the STOVL variant for the systems, it was decided to reduce the perceived risk of our aircraft same flight, as this had never been done before; and third, to Marines) be the focus of the JAST program. Thereafter, all the design by replacing the canard with a more conventional aft tail. This demonstrate the handling qualities and carrier suitability of the Naval contractors worked on developing Air Force, Navy, and STOVL was easily done, as one of the advantages of the lift fan concept was variant, because Lockheed Martin had never built a Naval fighter Marine variants of a single aircraft, although not all of the JAST the ability to rebalance the aircraft with relatively small changes in before. contractors had CALF contracts. Figure 17 is a timeline showing the size and location of the fan. The three JAST variants are shown in The Skunk Works proposal was to build two aircraft. One would the various programs that were integrated into the Joint Strike Fig. 18. be devoted to STOVL testing, because this had always been Fighter program. The dashed lines identify programs that never In May 1995, Lockheed Martin gave the Yak Aircraft Corporation perceived as the greatest challenge. The other would be first flown as actually awarded any study contracts to industry. A more complete a contract to provide an independent assessment of our STOVL the Air Force variant and then be modified by replacing the wing flaps Fig. 16 Large-scale wind-tunnel model. history covering the period up to 1994 is presented in [17]. propulsion system and airframe concept and also to provide lessons and slats to become the Naval variant. Both aircraft would be built The primary requirement for the Naval variant was the ability to learned from their STOVL aircraft development programs. They with the Naval structure. To reduce the cost of the demonstration, take off and land on a carrier in 300 ft or less with a 20 kt wind were provided with copies of everything regarding the competing available components were used for subsystems that were not critical flight. Measurements also showed that there was sufficient control over the deck. Lockheed Martin considered three alternative CALF concepts that had been published in the open literature, to the test objectives. For example, these aircraft used the nose gear power for acceleration and deceleration during transition and for approaches. The first alternative was for the Navy to operate the same including a copy of the U.S. patent [9] on the Lockheed dual-cycle from the F-15 and modified main landing gear from the A-6. The yaw control in crosswinds up to 20 kt. This technology maturation STOVL aircraft being developed for the Marines; this was certainly propulsion system. Drawing on their own experience developing increased weight of these off-the-shelf components was offset by not program [12,13] demonstrated the feasibility of the dual-cycle lift the easiest solution, but this aircraft would have less range/payload STOVL aircraft, Yak engineers provided us with predictions including mission avionics and weapons bays on the demonstrator fan propulsion system and reduced risk to Technology Readiness performance than a conventional Naval aircraft. of the STOVL performance, including ground effects, of all three aircraft. Level 5. The second alternative was to remove the lift fan and adapt the roll competing aircraft concepts. They also provided a risk assessment control jets to blow the wing flaps. This would increase the wing lift, of each concept. In addition, they provided useful design and per- reducing the aircraft takeoff and landing speeds and enabling it to use formance information for the lift systems of the Yak STOVL aircraft. Concept Demonstrator Contract Awards Joint Advanced Strike Technology Program the carrier catapult and arresting gear. However, the blown flaps on Their final report was very complimentary of our design and gave us In May of 1996, Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition and In February 1993, at the same time that the first CALF contracts the F-4 Phantom had proved difficult to maintain and Lockheed confidence that it was the right concept. Technology Paul Kaminski changed the program to an acquisition were awarded, the U.S. Department of Defense began a Bottom Up Martin did not feel the Navy would favor this approach. Instead, it At the end of this phase of the program, all three contractors had category 1D program and renamed it the Joint Strike Fighter Review (BUR) of American military forces and modernization was decided to increase the wing area by enlarging the flaps and slats designed demonstrator and production aircraft. The Lockheed program, reflecting the greater scope and cost of the next phase of plans. One of the main objectives was the rationalization of the five and adding a wingtip extension. The increased lift of the larger wing Martin and McDonnell Douglas designs were very similar con- development and making it clear to U.S. Congress that JSF was an tactical aircraft development programs then going on: the Air Force also reduced the takeoff and landing speeds and enabled use of the ventional wing/body/tail configurations, whereas Boeing had a aircraft development program. In November 1996, Boeing and F-22 and MRF programs, the Navy F/A-18E/F and A/F-X programs, catapult and arresting gear. An additional benefit of the larger wing is tailless delta configuration. Lockheed Martin had demonstrated the Lockheed Martin were selected to build concept demonstrator and the DARPA CALF program. The Air Force and Navy made a that it gives the Naval variant greater range than either the Marine dual-cycle shaft-driven lift fan concept at large scale in hover and aircraft. The Marines did not select the McDonnell Douglas lift joint presentation to the BUR task force in which they suggested or Air Force variants, both by reducing the induced drag and by transition. Boeing had tested their large-scale lift/cruise model in engine concept based on concerns regarding the logistics of developing a highly common MultiRole Fighter based on the SSF, providing additional volume for fuel. hover only. After testing the gas-driven lift fan propulsion system, maintaining two different engines in the same aircraft and reports called the Joint Attack Fighter. The Naval variant was envisioned as a Because the carrier arresting system imposes greater loads on the McDonnell Douglas approached Lockheed Martin for permission to about the Russian experience with the Yak-38 and Yak-141. conventional carrier-based aircraft. However, Marine Col. Durham at landing gear and airframe than a conventional landing, the landing work with Pratt & Whitney on a shaft-driven lift fan system of their McDonnell Douglas subsequently merged into Boeing, and BAE OSD [14] and Air Force Lt. Gen. Croker at Air Combat Command gear of the Naval variant was redesigned for a 25 fps vertical velocity, own, but were turned down. They switched to a lift engine concept; Systems and Northrop Grumman, which had been teamed with [15] argued that the Naval variant should be the STOVL aircraft rather than 10 fps used for the conventional and STOVL variants. however, they did not perform a large-scale demonstration of this McDonnell Douglas, joined the Lockheed Martin team. being developed by DARPA. Similarly, the nose gear was redesigned for catapult launches. The system. At this point, Lockheed Martin had become the low-risk Because the planforms of both the Lockheed Martin and the The results of the bottom-up review were announced in additional airframe loads were handled through the use of cousin alternative. Boeing aircraft were relatively conventional, and the F-22 had September 1993. It was decided to cancel the MRF and A/F-X parts, which are stronger parts that replace conventional parts without demonstrated that unfaceted fighter airframes could have reduced signatures, the competition was between the STOVL propulsion Joint Strike Fighter Program fl 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 system concepts. Thrust being the product of mass ow and velocity, In September 1995, not long after he was sworn in as Deputy Lockheed Martin’s approach to achieving the necessary high thrust- Secretary of Defense, John White was briefed by his staff on the to-weight ratio was to use a large mass flow of air at low velocity, ASTOVL shortfall in tactical aviation that was forecast to begin about 2010 and whereas Boeing’s approach was to use a smaller mass flow of air at a on the JAST program created to address the problem. After the higher velocity. The mass flow of the lift fan system was approxi- briefing, he directed Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition and mately 2.5 times greater than in Boeing’s lift/cruise system, and the Technology Paul Kaminski to create a plan for developing a new joint lift jet velocity was more than one-third lower. A-6 A-12 A/F-X aircraft from the JAST program. At a meeting with all the service The need to reduce fabrication costs of the demonstrator aircraft and the success of the STOVL wind-tunnel tests at NASA Ames enabled Lockheed Martin to change its commonality demonstration. It was decided to devote one aircraft to the demonstration of carrier fi fl JAF JAST handling qualities, and the other aircraft would rst be own as the Air Force variant and then be converted to the STOVL variant by removing the fuel tank and installing the lift fan. The X-35A conventional variant was the first to fly. Its first flight was on 24 October 2000 from the Lockheed plant in Palmdale, California, to F-16 MRF Edwards Air Force Base, a distance of just over 20 miles. It averaged a flight a day for the next 30 days, demonstrating fighterlike maneu- ver performance and supersonic speed. It met or exceeded all of its flight-test objectives. AV-8 F/A-18 SSFSSF1 SSF2 CALF JAST Joint Strike Fighter The test program achieved such high productivity because the airplane had been approved for air-to-air refueling on the basis of qualification in a flight simulator. This was another first, because Fig. 17 Timelines of the programs that were integrated into the JSF program (JAF denotes the Joint Attack Fighter). Fig. 18 Commonality of the three JAST aircraft variants. some new aircraft have taken more than a year of flight tests to be approved for aerial refueling. Boeing was not able to use air-to-air and the Pentagon credited the performance of the lift fan propulsion replace the Air Force F-16s, Navy and Marine F/A-18s, and Marine References fl refueling during its ight-test program. In a very unusual step at this system with the win, and the Lockheed Martin JSF team was AV-8s. All of the JSF variants have essentially the same airframe, [1] Tyler, T., Chambers, C., and Perkins, R., “An Assessment of the Sea early stage in an aircraft development program, this aircraft was subsequently awarded the 2001 Collier Trophy for the development engine, avionics, and subsystems. By spreading the development and Based Air Master Study,” AIAA Aircraft Systems Meeting, AIAA flown by American and British military test pilots in addition to the and demonstration of the lift fan propulsion system. support costs of these components over a larger number of aircraft, Paper 80-1820, Anaheim, CA, Aug. 1980. Lockheed Martin and BAE Systems test pilots. The developmental aircraft have a strong resemblance to the each variant becomes more affordable. In addition, the Air Force and [2] Ward, B., and Penrose, C., “The Hybrid Fan Vectored Thrust Engine,” During December and January, the conventional X-35A was demonstrator aircraft. The planform of the airframe is the same, and Naval variants will provide greater stealth and range than the aircraft Society of Automotive Engineers, Paper 831496, Oct. 1983. converted into the STOVL X-35B by installing the lift fan and the layout of the engine, lift fan, and nozzles is also retained. they will replace, and the Marine variant will combine the supersonic [3] Driggers, H., Powers, S., and Roush, R., “Study of Aerodynamic thrust-vectoring nozzle. During the spring of 2001, the aircraft was However, the prototypes incorporate mission equipment, including performance of the F/A-18C with the short takeoff and vertical Technology for Single Engine VSTOL Fighter/Attack Aircraft,” NASA tethered to a deflector grid that diverted the lift jets to minimize weapons bays, mission avionics, and low-observable coatings. Off- landing performance of the AV-8B. CR 166271, Feb. 1982. [4] Heiser, W. H., “Thrust Augmentation,” Journal of Engineering for ground effects. The operation of the propulsion system (engine, the-shelf subsystems used in the demonstrators have been replaced The technical challenges involved in designing a single aircraft for Power, Vol. 89, No. 1, Jan. 1967, pp. 75–82. lift fan, nozzles, and reaction control system) was checked and with new designs to reduce weight. Similarly, the ram air cooling all three services were met by designing three highly common, but [5] Bevilaqua, P., “Joint Strike Fighter Dual Cycle Propulsion System,” measured. On 23 June 2001, the aircraft was untethered and BAE systems used on the demonstrator aircraft were replaced by liquid not identical, variants of the same aircraft. The STOVL variant, Journal of Propulsion and Power, Vol. 21, No. 5, Sept. 2005, pp. 778– Systems test pilot Simon Hargreaves advanced the throttles to take cooling systems, such as those on the F-22. The wing span of the which was designed first, incorporates a shaft-driven lift fan in a bay 783. weight off the wheels to check the response of the control system in F-35A/B was increased slightly to improve maneuver and range between the inlet ducts and a thrust-vectoring cruise nozzle. The doi:10.2514/1.15228 this case. The airplane rose straight up to a height of 20 ft, under performance. The rudder and horizontal tails were also enlarged to airframe was designed to Air Force specifications, so that the [6] Davidson, I. M., “The Jet Flap,” Journal of the Royal Aeronautical complete control, before Hargreaves settled it back to the grid. This increase control power. The weapons bay doors on the STOVL conventional takeoff and landing variant was developed by removing Society, Vol. 60, Jan. 1956, pp. 25–50. flight is shown in Fig. 19. variant were designed to open during vertical landing to capture the the lift fan and vectoring nozzles from the STOVL variant and [7] Willoughby, W., “Best Practices,” U.S. Government Printing fi Over the next month, the aircraft made 38 flights from the runway fountain created by the lift jets and counter suckdown in ground substituting a fuel tank and a conventional cruise nozzle. The Naval Of ce, Washington D.C., Dept. of the Navy, NAVSO P-6071, fi March 1986. at Edwards Air Force Base during which the STOVL and transition effect. Because this bene t had been demonstrated on the large-scale variant was similarly developed from the conventional variant by [8] Burns, B., “Advanced Aerodynamic Design for Future Combat performance were validated. Then, on 20 July 2001, the X-35B, model at NASA Ames, weapons bay doors had not been included on increasing the wing area, designing stronger landing gear, and using Aircraft,” Proceedings of the International Council of the Aeronautical flown by Marine Maj. Art Tomassetti, became the first aircraft in the demonstrator aircraft. The lift fan inlet and nozzle were also stronger cousin parts to handle the larger airframe loads associated Sciences, 1982, pp. 23–33. history to make a short takeoff, fly supersonically, hover, and land changed. with carrier takeoffs and landings. Both the STOVL and Naval [9] Bevilaqua, P., and Shumpert, P., “Propulsion System for a Short Takeoff vertically. Boeing’s X-32 aircraft were not able to demonstrate this The cockpit of the prototype aircraft is considerably more variants are about 15% heavier than the conventional variant. and Landing Aircraft,” Lockheed Corp., Calabasas, CA, U.S. Patent Mission X. Lockheed Martin pilot Tom Morgenfeld ferried the advanced than in the demonstrators. The controllers in the X-35B The program challenges were met by having a credible technical No. 5,209,428, 11 May 1993. aircraft back to Palmdale on the aircraft’s final flight on were similar to those in the Harrier, with a control stick, throttle, and a solution and by creating a Joint Program Office, staffed by members [10] Rich, B., “The Skunk Works’ Management Style: It’s No Secret,” 1988 Wright Brothers Lecture, AIAA Paper 1988-4516, 1988. 6 August 2001. The aircraft was refueled six times in the air and separate nozzle lever. In the F-35B, nozzle vectoring is controlled of all three services. The positions of Acquisition Executive and “ ” the flight lasted 3.5 h, ending with six touch-and-go landings. automatically by the stick commands. There is also a voice command Program Manager were rotated between the services. This program [11] Mullin, S., The Evolution of the F-22 Advanced Tactical Fighter, 1992 Wright Brothers Lecture, AIAA Paper 1992-4188, 1992. The second aircraft, configured as the X-35C Naval variant, made system for noncritical functions, such as controlling radio frequency. office developed a joint operational requirements document, which fi fl [12] Bevilaqua, P., Eshleman, J., Falabella, D., Post, M., Quayle, B., and its rst ight on 16 December 2001. Lockheed Martin pilot Joe The cockpit instrumentation in the X-35 included a head-up display freed the airframe contractors from the need to satisfy multiple Tait, P., “ASTOVL Aircraft Technology Demonstration Program,” Sweeney ferried it to Edwards Air Force Base. During 33 h of flight- (HUD) and two small color displays from a C-130 on the instrument customers or mediate between them. Lockheed Martin Skunk Works, Rept. TR 96-1, Palmdale, CA, testing at Edwards Air Force Base, it successfully demonstrated the panel. The cockpit of the F-35 includes a virtual HUD projected onto The three F-35 variants will initially replace at least 13 types May 1996. use of a side-stick controller in simulated carrier approaches. In the visor of the pilot’s helmet and a single large instrument display of aircraft for 11 nations, making the Lightning II the most cost- [13] Eshleman, J., “Large Scale Testing of the Lockheed Martin JSF February 2001, the X-35C was flown from Edwards Air Force Base panel that the pilot can divide into several different screens. effective fighter program in history. Lockheed Martin is developing Configuration,” Proceedings of the International Powered Lift in California to the Patuxent River Naval Air Station in Maryland, The 24,000 lb weight limit and Weight as an Independent Variable the F-35 with its principal industrial partners, Northrop Grumman Conference, SAE P-306, Society of Automotive Engineers, becoming the first X-Plane in history to make a coast to coast flight were not used for the design of the production aircraft. As a result, the and BAE Systems. Two interchangeable engines are under devel- Warrendale, PA, 1996, pp. 319–340. “ across the United States. Another 33 h of flight-testing were desire to improve performance and to reduce manufacturing costs opment: the Pratt & Whitney F135, which powered the first aircraft, [14] Morrocco, J., Joint Attack Fighter Eyed to Replace A/F-X, MRF, and F-22,” Aviation Week and Space Technology, May 1993, pp. 21–22. completed at Patuxent River. The X-35C also achieved supersonic began to add weight to the airframe. For example, a gun was added and the GE Rolls-Royce F136. “ ” fi 9 fi [15] Croker, S., ASTOVL Technology Still Possible for JAF, Defense speeds and accomplished more than 250 eld carrier landing practice and the maneuver limit was raised from 7.5 to g; the wing structure The success of the Wright Brothers in building the rst practical Daily, 5 May 1993. demonstrations. These showed the carrier suitability of the Naval was redesigned to include pylons for external weapons, and the airplane was due to their approach to solving the problems of [16] Walsh, E., “The JAST Program and Beyond,” SEAPOWER Magazine, variant. number of wing attach points was reduced to simplify assembly; the manned flight. The key elements of their approach were team- June 1994, pp. 27–30. Flight-testing of the three X-35 variants reduced the risk of the JSF airframe structure was redesigned to accommodate subsystems and work, constructive debate, innovative thinking, systematic testing, [17] Aronstein, D., and Hirschberg, M., “An Overview of the US/UK airframe and propulsion systems to Technology Readiness Level 6. facilitate access, etc. By January 2004, weight had increased by more and a skeptical study of the relevant literature. Lockheed Martin’s ASTOVL Programs, 1983–1994,” International Powered Lift Confer- The X-35A/B is in the permanent collection of the Smithsonian than 3000 lb. To get the weight back out, a design stand-down was success in developing the Joint Strike Fighter is further evidence of ence, AHS International, Paper IPLC-2000-00039, 2000. Institution and was placed on display at the Udvar-Hazy Center. The declared on 7 April 2004 and the entire team shifted their emphasis the value of the Wright Brothers’ approach. X-35C is on display at the Naval Air Museum in Patuxent River. to weight reduction. Lockheed Martin offered a $100 bonus to employees for every weight-saving idea and awarded $500 for every fi F-35 Lightning II Program pound removed. More than 2000 ideas were submitted on the rst day and more than 2700 lb were removed from the airframe by the In November 2000, the JSF Program Office requested proposals end of the year. Lockheed Martin awarded more than $1.35 million to from both teams for the manufacture and test of 22 developmental its employees for their weight-saving ideas. aircraft: 8 ground-test aircraft and 14 flight-test aircraft. The pro- On 19 February 2006, the first Air Force F-35Awas rolled out at the posals were submitted in February 2001, six months before the end Lockheed Martin plant in Fort Worth, Texas. After a series of ground of flight-testing. On 26 October 2001, the JSF Program Office vibration tests, it was unveiled in a public ceremony on 7 July 2006, announced that Lockheed Martin had won the competition. Boeing when the Air Force announced that it would be called the Lightning II. The first flight of the F-35A was on 15 December 2006. The first STOVL F-35B was unveiled a year later, on 18 December 2007, and made its first flight on 11 June 2008. It will be flown using conventional takeoffs and landings through the end of 2008 and is scheduled to make short takeoffs, then hover, and finally make vertical landings during 2009. In addition to the two aircraft currently in flight test, one is in ground test, five more flight-test aircraft are in final assembly, and another 14 are in various stages of completion on the production line. The first aircraft are expected to become operational with the U.S. Marine Corps in 2012, with the U.S. Air Force in 2013, with the British Royal Navy and Air Force in 2014, and with the U.S. Navy in 2015. Conclusions The Joint Strike Fighter will achieve significant savings in aircraft Fig. 19 First hover flight of the X-35B. production and life cycle costs by providing a common aircraft to 1.0 THE JSF AND CVF PROGRAMS Although the ramp is physically part of the ship and responsibility for its manufacture and installation lies with the ACA, its profile is entirely based on the aircraft characteristics and for this reason the development of a CVF ski-jump ramp profile profile optimised for the F-35B was conducted by the CVF Integration 1.1 Overview of the JSF program Support Team (CVFIST) on behalf of Team JSF in 2006 and 2007. Team JSF (TJSF) comprises Lockheed Martin, BAE Systems and Northrop Grumman and will produce the JSF aircraft in three variants: 1.4 F-35B STOVL lift and propulsion system optimisation for F-35B conventional take-off and landing (CTOL); carrier based variant (CV); and a short take-off and vertical landing (STOVL) aircraft. This paper deals The F-35B has a number of unique elements that facilitate its STOVL http://www.raes.org.uk/ with the STOVL aircraft, designated capability, and these are critical in the optimisation of a ski jump ramp F-35B, which is currently selected by the UK as its Joint Combat Aircraft profile for the aircraft. A basic description of the layout and function of the pdfs/3324_COLOUR.pdf (JCA), to be operated by the Royal Navy and Royal Air Force replacing lift and propulsion system is shown in Fig. 2 and described below: the existing Harrier fleet. ● a Lift Fan driven by a shaft from the main engine which provides A. Fry, R. Cook and N. Revill vertical lift through a variable area vane box nozzle using louvered vanes to vector thrust between vertically downwards and partially aft. [email protected] 1.2 overview of the CVF programme ● a three-bearing swivel module (3BSM), which vectors the main The Future Aircraft Carrier (CVF) programme is managed by the Aircraft engine exhaust thrust from the core engine through vertically Carrier Alliance (ACA), an industry and government consortium, and will downwards to fully aft – the latter being the default for conventional produce two new carrier vessels entering service from 2014 to replace the mode flying. BAE Systems existing Invincible class of ships and is illustrated with the F-35B in Fig. 1. ● roll nozzles, ducted from the engine and exiting in each wing These carriers will act as the UK’s mobile air-base, operating and providing roll control and vertical lift. These are closed off during the Warton supporting a wide variety of aircraft in support of UK expeditionary opera- initial portion of the short take-off (STO) in order to maximise tions – obviating the need to rely on other countries co-operation. The forward thrust from the main engine, opening towards the end of the UK THE AERONAUTICAL JOURNAL FEBRUARY 2009 VOLUME 113 NO 1140 embarked air group will primarily consist of JCA but will also include ramp in order to provide control and lift during the fly out. Airborne Surveillance and Control, Maritime, Support, Attack and http://www.scribd.com/doc/190161709/CVF-Ski- Battlefield helicopters depending on the mission. In the Carrier Strike role, up to 36 JCA will be embarked, capable of 2.0 THE SKI JUMP RAMP jump-Ramp-Profile-Optimisation-for-F-35B-3324- operating in all weathers, day and night; providing a long range strike COLOUR capability in addition to air defence and offensive support to the fleet and ground troops. 2.1 Background and history of the ramp 1.3 CVF integration support program The ski jump ramp was conceived by a Royal Navy officer in the 1970s and subsequently developed by the UK services, industry and Government This program and team was established as part of TJSF and tasked to as a way of increasing the STO launch payload for the Harrier. It has since provide existing and newly generated engineering information to support become an integral part of embarked operations for UK and most foreign the ACA in the integration of F-35B with CVF. Harrier operators. The first operational ramp was fitted to HMS Hermes (see Fig. 3) in 1979 and was a 12 degree ramp; as defined by the angle to the horizontal of the tangent at the last point on the profile. The Invincible class of Anti-Submarine Carriers (CVS) were modified during building to accommodate the Sea Harrier aircraft and were ABSTRACT NOMENCLATURE completed with a 7 degree ramp in the early 1980s. This lower angle was chosen to avoid obstructing the firing arcs of the Surface to Air Missile This paper presents a summary of the principles and processes used to 3BSM 3 Bearing swivel module system fitted to this class although giving less launch performance benefit. design a ski-jump ramp profile for the UK’s Future Aircraft Carrier (CVF) ACA aircraft carrier alliance Due in part to the success of the Harrier in the 1982 Falklands war these optimised for the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF). CG centre of gravity ramps were replaced by a larger 12 degree design later in the 1980s. The ships and their ramps have given valuable service to the UK through to this The paper includes an overview of the CVF and JSF programs, a history CTOL conventional take-off and landing day with successive generations of the Harrier family, as Fig. 4 illustrates. and summary of the ski-jump ramp and the principles of its use in the CV carrier variant shipborne Short Take-Off (STO) manoeuvre. CVS anti submarine carrier Invincible The paper discusses the importance of defining optimisation boundaries (descriptor for the class of ships) CVF UK future aircraft carrier project including specified objectives, aircraft configurations and environmental CVFIST CVF integration support team conditions. It then demonstrates the process of balancing the design drivers Figure 1. Artists impression of CVF and F-35B. DEFSTAN UK MoD defence standard publication of air vehicle performance and landing gear loads to achieve an optimum Dstl Defence Science and Technology Laboratory profile. Comparisons are made between the proposed candidate CVF ramp EC environmental condition (e.g. Hot/ISA day) profile and the current in service ski-jump design as designed for the JCA UK joint combat aircraft project Harrier family of aircraft. JSF Joint Strike Fighter The paper briefly covers some of the important issues and factors that SDD system development and design phase have been experienced when a theoretical profile is translated into a STO short take-off physical ramp fitted to a ship, principally the effects on aircraft operations STOVL short take-off and vertical landing due to build and in-service variation from the nominal profile. TJSF Team JSF Paper No. 3324. Manuscript received 31 July 2008, accepted 16 October 2008. Copyright BAE Systems 2008. All rights reserved. Published by the Royal Aeronautical Society with permission. This paper was originally presented at the 2008 International Powered Lift Conference at The Royal Aeronautical Society, London. Figure 2. F-35B and its STOVL Propulsion and Lift System. Figure 3. HMS Hermes with first 12° ski jump ramp. This margin primarily accounts for variation between the mathematical profile derived during the analysis and the ‘as-built’ steel structure that flexes with the operation of the ship and can develop a permanent defor- mation. Legacy experience is explicit that this build and in-service physical variance can result in gear load increases of a severity requiring operational performance restrictions. Graphically illustrated in Fig. 9, the load margin is obtained by speci- fying a minimum remaining strut stroke in the worst loading case based on legacy experience, applying this to the load/stroke curve and using the Figure 8. Ski-jump launch profile. resulting load/stroke point as the metric against which launch cases are assessed. Figure 4. HMS Illustrious with retrofitted 12° ramp. Figure 5. Ramp design drivers. 5.0 CHARACTERISATION 2.2 Principles of the ski jump The ski jump ramp works by imparting an upward vertical velocity and ballistic profile to the aircraft, providing additional time to accelerate to 5.1 Performance flying speed whilst ensuring it is on a safe trajectory. This additional time is The sensitivity studies initially used the existing CVS ramp profile as a manifested either in a reduced take-off length for a given weight, or baseline, and showed that the high weight configurations at higher ambient increased weight (i.e. launch performance) for a fixed take-off distance as temperatures were the most stressing in terms of what payload capability in a ship based STO. was achievable. Figure 10 displays a performance characterisation at The additional performance does not come for free, with a significant different environmental conditions (EC 1 to 4) with the CVS ramp, and increase in landing gear loads above those of a standard take off (which are showing the target configuration (weight) is achievable bar the most very low compared to a landing). The increase represents the energy trans- stressing condition. ferred to the aircraft as it translates up the ramp; and if the angle and Figure 9. Landing gear loads/stroke margin. A nominal case from which comparisons could be made against past curvature of the ramp are increased to obtain greater performance benefit, and baseline predictions of performance was developed, as were a range of so are the loads. This is tolerable up to a point because the gear strength is Reference 8 details the work performed by Dstl to examine the key weight cases in order to provide the on-ramp schedules of control effectors defined by landing events and thus has the ability to accept the increased factors and CVF/JCA requirements which influenced this task, in (nozzle angles, thrust split and elevator angle) for use in the landing gear take-off loads, but loads act as an upper boundary on permissible ramp particular, development of the key performance and loads cases in terms of loads analysis. The effects of varying WOD and aircraft CG were also size, as illustrated in Fig. 5. aircraft configurations and environmental conditions which formed the investigated. The ideal landing gear vertical load time history for a ski jump ramp customers objectives. Other ground rules such as take off distances, For the F-35B, optimum scheduling of thrust and control effectors is a STO is sketched in Fig. 6, with a rapid increase to a steady maximum vital component of maximising the performance benefit of a ski jump ramp Figure 6. Ideal and Actual Ramp Landing Gear Vertical Load Profiles. maximum ramp length and height constraints, wind over deck speeds where the area underneath the curve represents the energy imparted by the (WOD) and ship motion factors were also generated prior to the main and this was assumed possible based on SDD practice. Optimum sched- ramp. However, the actual loads are different, and reflect the complex analysis which was based on legacy experience with Harrier analysis, TJSF uling after leaving the ski-jump was achieved using a theory developed by dynamic response of the gear components as they enter and travel up the SDD best practice, and sensitivity studies of performance and loads to Dstl and outlined in Ref. 9. curvature of the profile. identify sensible values and ranges. References 1, 2 and 3 describe in further detail the principles behind the Previous assessments considered pilot view of the sea and deck as well 5.2 Loads ski jump and its advantages as part of a STO manoeuvre compared to a flat as handling qualities which were found to be benign for ski-jump STOs deck launch and the design of the profile is described later. and since they do not drive the design of the ramp, are not discussed For loads, the gear response on entering the ramp is essentially a function It should be noted that non-STOVL aircraft can benefit from a ski jump further. of energy, i.e. mass and speed, and it was necessary to investigate a range manoeuvre, as illustrated by the Russian use of ramps with conventional of weight and speed cases in order to identify the worst case in order to type aircraft from their carriers. STOVL aircraft are unique however then use that as a ‘working’ case for the optimisation phase. This balance is because of the flexible and complex manner in which the thrust and control 4.2 Safe launch metric not intuitive since the highest weights are only achievable with higher effectors generate combinations of thrust and forward speed in conjunction WOD speeds and the gear loading may be offset by the additional wing with the speed dependent wing lift. At the core of a ski jump performance analysis is the assessment of whether a launch case is achievable or not. The minimum safe launch is lift. The opposite case, at lighter weight but with excess deck run and thus defined where the ramp exit speed does not result in any rate of descent high entry speed, was included for balance. during the trajectory until the aircraft has transitioned to fully wing-borne The sensitivity to changes in the control effector scheduling was investi- 3.0 RAMP DESIGN PROCESS flight. This results in the launch profile shown in Fig. 8, with an inflection gated in order to understand how changes to these to optimise for perfor- point at which the criteria for a successful launch are assessed. mance can impact loads – as were centre of gravity (CG) variations, Figure 7 illustrates the overall concept adopted for the design of the CVF There are two safe launch criteria derived from legacy STOVL different WOD speeds, use of external stores (for their aerodynamic drag ramp and this was strongly influenced by the documentary evidence and experience that are used on the JSF program, of which the more stressing is increment effect on speed, forces and moments) and different methods of guidance from previous ramp design tasks. References 4 to 7 and the adopted: (a) subtracting a margin from the WOD and requiring zero sink modelling the strut internal pressures. acknowledgements reflect drawing on past experience and knowledge, and rate (known as Operational WOD); and (b) using the full value of WOD the team’s contribution was to then optimise it to the F-35B aircraft using but requiring a defined positive rate of climb. Both also require a threshold TJSF analysis tools. forward acceleration. 4.0 REQUIREMENTS 4.3 Landing gear loads metric In a ski jump STO event, the gear axle load is almost entirely in the vertical direction represented by Fz. Additionally, because the rate of application of 4.1 Defining optimisation parameters load is relatively slow in comparison to a landing event, the load and stroke An essential first step in the process was to specify criteria that would can be considered to approximately track the airspring force/displacement bound the task and provide measures for driving the design and evaluating curve as shown in Fig. 9. its success. Without having these to reduce the design space to manageable The maximum load and stroke are defined by the limit load and boundaries, optimising for the ‘best’ ramp could be equated to ‘how long is bottoming stroke of the landing gear, but it is necessary to set an optimi- a piece of string ?’. Figure 7. Ramp Design Process. sation metric below this in order to generate an engineering margin. Figure 10. Launch envelope for CVS ramp. To account for ship motion due to the sea state, a delta was added to the gear from uncompressing too quickly. Note that the CVS 12° ramp is value used for gravity (ΔG). This is a legacy approach and replaces the actually now 11·26° as a result of converting the last section of the ramp to huge matrix of pitch, roll and yaw attitudes, velocities and accelerations of a let down – and entailing a slight performance reduction. the ship and aircraft with a single factor. Figure 11 shows the main gear axle load for the worst weight and and speed case at 1G and 1+ΔG, using both short and long ramps of the same 6.4 Profile development exit angle as a way of examining the effect of ramp curvature on gear This looked at a large number of ramp profiles using a wide range of loads. transition length and arc radius values, of which the key conclusions were: This phase of the work demonstrated that for the worst case launch the ● Short transition lengths produce high load overshoot peaks and oscil- CVS ramp would breach the load metrics applied, but also indicated that lations on the first part of the ramp. These outweigh the benefit of using additional length, thus reducing the curvature, could alleviate this. reduced loads from the higher circular arc radius later in the ramp. ● Long transition lengths produce much lower initial load peaks, but to remain within the overall design length the circular arc radius has to 6.0 OPTIMISATION Figure 15. Gear load variation with ramp exit angle. be increased, producing a counteracting load peak. Δ This phase centred on the selection of a ramp exit angle and the shaping of Figure 11. Axle loads for long and short ramps, 1 and 1+ G. The combined effect of varying transition length and circular arc radius the ramp profile to achieve this. is to vary the concentration of curvature in different parts of the ramp. With both of these linked by the requirement to fit an overall length constraint, it was necessary to combine transition length and circular arc radius into a 6.1 Performance single variable, and in Fig. 17 this is plotted against the peak gear loads for the ramps that demonstrated broadly acceptable loads. Analysis showed that performance is affected primarily by the exit angle, The minimum point in each curve represents its optimum, and it is clear with diminishing aircraft performance returns from increasing exit angle. that it differs for the nose and main gears. With the main gear identified as Figure 12 shows the trend of launch benefit ‘flattening off’ as the exit angle driving the ramp optimisation (see Fig. 15) – then it is from this optimum increases above the CVS datum. Figure 16. Elements of a ski-jump ramp profile. point that the detailed profile is derived. This flattening off is more severe than seen in legacy Harrier analysis, but exists due to the fundamental differences in the F-35Bs STOVL propulsion system. For the F-35B, with increasing ramp 6.5 Quartic profile exit angle, the nozzle vector angles and thrust split (between lift fan and core) required to trim the aircraft mean the propulsion system is not The use of a polynomial equation to represent the ramp profile is reflected operating at the point at which maximum total system thrust is generated, in that the transition is a cubic and the circular arc a quadratic. The use of a thus reducing the air path acceleration. At higher weights the acceleration single cubic or quartic equation to define a profile was mentioned previ- reduces below the minimum threshold, as shown in Fig. 13. Figure 12. Performance variation with ramp exit angle. ously as a method but, although unsuccessful in direct application, the This lower air path acceleration results in the initial post-exit increased effort did highlight the advantage that a curve to a quartic equation has a height rate benefit of higher exit angles being washed out to approximately smoother variation of curvature and offers the advantages of a less oscil- the same as lower exit angles by the end point of the analysis, as demon- latory load profile and a lower peak. A least squares fit method was used to strated in Fig. 14. convert the optimum cubic transition plus circular arc profile to a quartic This balance is indicative of the complexity of optimising the perfor- curve, and the variation of curvature is plotted in Fig. 18. mance, other factors including the need during the STO manoeuvre to This demonstrates the subtle change in curvature, and Fig. 19 shows the angle the core nozzle downwards slightly in order to offset the lift fan significant change in gear loads resulting. vertical thrust (since its aft angle is restricted) and ensure a minimum nose In addition to the slight reduction in peak gear loads, the load trace gear load for adequate steering. Figure 17. Gear Loads against ramp profile index. exhibits beneficial features with less oscillatory behaviour and a marked turndown towards the end of the ramp. The latter is of considerable value as it eliminates the new load peak being generated in the original profile. 6.2 Loads and exit angle decision The method used to generate the nominal profile was that of a cubic Note also that the nose gear sees a slight increase in both peak load and its Using the loads metric as an upper boundary achieves the most efficient transition into a circular arc, consisting of a fixed transition length and a oscillatory tendencies, although there is still a large margin available. ramp, as defined by imparting the maximum upward momentum without fixed radius of curvature, an approach common in engineering disciplines, exceeding the loads metric. A range of ski jump ramps were created using e.g. railway track transitions from straight sections into corners and aerody- the longer version of the CVS angled ramp as a template to design higher namic streamlining. Geometric relationships are used to match the 6.6 Lead in and let down angled ramps. Figure 15 shows the nose and main peak gear loads tangency at the end of the cubic transition curve with the start of the Figure 19 also shows the rapid load increase at the ramp entry and the lead generated. Figure 13. Air path acceleration against ramp exit angle. circular arc. Overall height and length are outputs and creating a ramp to in, in this case a rounded step. Assessment of different sized steps, as well From this it can be seen that the nose gear is well below the metric for all satisfy constraints in these requires iteration. The key advantage is that the as using much longer lead-ins was conducted with little or no difference angles, and that a maximum exists for the main gear. curvature can be controlled in two easily understood and modifiable noted. A decision was taken to use a similarly sized step as the CVS ramp The maximum exit angle dictated by the gear loads is 12·5 degrees, variables that relate directly to the profile and loads. on the grounds that this approximated the diameter of runway arrestor slightly greater than the CVS angle, and was selected as the ramp exit angle There are alternative ways of generating the nominal profile, described wires used for trampling analysis in the main SDD program and which for the following reasons: in the references, but the ‘cubic plus transition’ was deemed the most show similar acceptable loadings. ● The loads are at their maximum tolerable threshold as defined by the effective. Trials with other methods proved them to be significantly more The let down was designed as an ellipse, blending from the tangent at metrics. complex to use with no observable benefits. the end of the nominal profile to the horizontal, where it would interface ● The level of performance derived from this angle is comparable with The lead-in step intersects the nominal profile allowing the section prior with the proposed aerodynamic fairing that sits ahead of the ramp. the requirements. to this, which consists of negligible height (and thus of minimal benefit whilst also being difficult to manufacture) to be eliminated so the length ● CVS ramp performance capability is achieved, but with acceptable freed up can be used for a higher radius of curvature. The resulting load loads. spike at the step is within load limits and actually aids the overall process 7.0 CANDIDATE RAMP DEFINITION by rapidly increasing the load towards the steady maximum as in Fig. 6, The CVF candidate ramp was defined as a 12·5 degree angled ramp with which also reduces the peak of the overshoot on ramp entry, particularly 6.3 Ramp profile design the profile achieved by combining a nominal profile based on a quartic fit for the nose gear. to an optimum cubic transition plus circular arc, a rounded step lead in and Having identified a suitable exit angle, effort was then focussed on devel- The let down was added to previous ramps when it was discovered that an elliptic let down. Definitive performance and landing gear loads data oping a detailed profile. A ski jump ramp can be characterised as having the rapid unloading of the gear at ramp exit caused loading problems and were generated to demonstrate the resulting capability and compliance with Figure 14. Height rate against air speed for varied ramp exit angle. three distinct parts, as illustrated in Fig. 16. there was a requirement to provide a section of ramp that would restrain the the metrics. 8.0 OTHER RAMP DESIGN ISSUES Patuxent River Naval Air Station, Maryland, USA In addition to the single event performance and loads analysis used to optimise the ramp profile, other aspects were considered for CVF ramp optimisation: ● Cyclical loading: fatigue impact was assessed and found to be significantly lower for the candidate ramp than a CVS ramp. ● Weapons physical clearance: to ensure that the carriage of bulky external stores (e.g. stand-off missiles or fuel tanks) does not result in parts of these breaching minimum clearance distances due to the curvature of the ramp. Worst case store loadings with combinations of fully flat tyres and compressed struts confirmed Figure 18. Variation of curvature against length for original cubic transition plus circular arc, and quartic fit. no clearance breaches. 8.1 Manufacturing The ramp profile must be transformed into a physical structure, and to do this build tolerances on the candidate profile are required. Figure 20 illustrates the elements of the ramp profile and the issues related to manufacturing. As discussed earlier, a margin was applied to the loads metrics in order to account for variations between the mathematical profile derived during the analysis and the ‘as-built’ structure. To ensure this margin was sufficient and to provide the ship builders with useful guidance regarding build tolerances, analysis was conducted on each of the elements and issues: Figure 19. Main and nose gear loads for original and quartic fit. ● Segment size: this is the discretisation of the ramp when speci- fying ordinates and represents the size of each flat plate that forms the curve. Increasing segment length raises the angle between each plate leading to load spikes. JSF ski jump ● Co-ordinate accuracy; this represents the accuracy to which the theoretical curve is converted into a set of ‘design-to’ points at an accuracy level appropriate for manufacturing, with loads affected tests due due to the change in angle between each point. ● Bumps and dips: These are variations from the ‘design-to’ profile when designed, fabricated, installed and subject to usage, which in 2011 result in raised and/or sagged parts of the ramp. A modified DEFSTAN approach (Ref. 10), using bump/dip depth and length parameters based on legacy experience was utilised to produce a 08 Jul 2010 suitable build tolerance. Figure 20. Ramp profile, manufacturing elements and issues. “'Ski jump' trials of the Lockheed Martin F-35B Lightning II Joint Strike 9.0 CONCLUSION Fighter are expected to take place in 18 months' time at US Naval Air The paper has covered all the principles and processes used in Station (NAS) Patuxent River in Maryland. The tests will see if the F-35B designing a candidate ski-jump ramp profile for the CVF, optimised for the F-35B. REFERENCES can fly from the take-off ramps to be fitted to the UK Royal Navy's two new With loads metric eventually dictating the choice of exit angle and 1. FOZARD, J.W. Ski-Jump – A great leap for tactical airpower, British Aerospace the ramp profile shape, this demonstrates the importance of developing Paper, 1979. Queen Elizabeth-class future aircraft carriers (CVF), but BAE Systems F-35 and defining the optimisation metrics.Compared to the CVS ramp, the 2. SPAVINS, C.S. Harrier – ski jump, RAE Bedford Paper, ~1981. candidate ramp offers comparable performance but with acceptable 3. THORBY, D.C., JOHNSON, J., AULD, A.B.K., NEWMAN, H.T. and BROOKER, M.J. test pilot Graham Tomlinson told Jane's that he expects such take-offs to loads. The special requirements of a VSTOL aircraft, British Aerospace, AGARD Paper October 1990. be far more straightforward than those from flat deck aircraft carriers.” The key issues involved in converting a mathematical profile to a 4. JOHNSON, J. and THORBY, D.C. Sea Harrier: The design of a 6 degree ramp for physical structure have been explained. a 425ft flight deck, BAE Systems Internal Report: HSA-KSD-N-HAR-715, http://articles.janes.com/articles/Janes-Defence-Weekly-2010/JSF-ski-jump-tests-due-in-2011.html The team and customer are now taking this profile forward as part of April 1976. the continuing integration of the F-35B aircraft onto CVF. 5. AULD, A. A ski-jump ramp design for INS Vikrant, BAE Systems Internal Report: BAE-KSD-N_HAR-1042, October 1981. 6. THORBY, D.C. Landing gear for ASTOVL: A Discussion Paper, BAE Systems Internal Report: BAE-KAE-N-AST-4081 June 1993. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 7. THORBY, D.C. STOVL Landing gear criteria and related topics, British Aerospace Internal Memorandum, 1999. Rob Chapman BAE Systems 8. ROSA, M. and ROLFE, R. Ski-Jump launch performance studies in Dstl, Dstl John Johnson BAE Systems IPLC08 Paper 06, July 2008. John Medzorian Lockheed Martin 9. NICHOLAS, O.P. An insight into optimal launch performance from a ski-jump, Tim Newman BAE Systems Dstl Report, October 2003. Martin Rosa Dstl 10. MoD DEFSTAN 00-970 Pt3, 1, (305), Design of undercarriages – operation Steve Solomon Lockheed Martin from surfaces other than smooth runways. UK MoD Publication, 1994. Midfield Ski Jump CVF ski-jump ramp profile optimisation for F-35B A. Fry, R. Cook and N. Revill, FEBRUARY 2009 VOLUME 113 NO 1140: http://www.raes.org.uk/pdfs/3324_COLOUR.pdf - “...1.4 F-35B STOVL lift and propulsion system The F-35B has a number of unique elements that facilitate its STOVL capability, and these are critical in the optimisation of a ski jump ramp profile for the aircraft.... and described below: Ɣ a Lift Fan driven by a shaft from the main engine which provides ver- tical lift through a variable area vane box nozzle using louvered vanes to vector thrust between vertically downwards and partially aft. Ɣ a three-bearing swivel module (3BSM), which vectors the main eng- ine exhaust thrust from the core engine through vertically downwards to fully aft – the latter being the default for conventional mode flying. Ɣ roll nozzles, ducted from the engine and exiting in each wing providing roll control and vertical lift. These are closed off during the initial portion of the short take-off (STO) in order to maximise forward thrust from the main engine, opening towards the end of the ramp in order to provide control and lift during the fly out....” Integration of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter with the UK QUEEN ELIZABETH Class Aircraft Carrier | David C. Atkinson, BAE Systems; Rob Brown, BAE Systems; Richard Potts, BAE Systems; David Bennett, BAE Systems; John E. Ward, Aircraft Carrier Alliance; Eddie Trott, Aircraft Carrier Alliance | Chapter DOI: 10.2514/6.2013-4267; Publication Date: http://arc.aiaa.org/doi/abs/10.2514/6.2013-4267 August 12-14, 2013 Using Simulation to Optimize Ski Jump Ramp Profiles for STOVL Aircraft Dec 01, 1999 Greg Imhof and Bill Schork | Naval Air Warfare Center/Aircraft Division | Air Vehicle Department | Patuxent River, MD Abstract for AIAA Modeling and Simulation Technologies Conference 14-17 August 2000 Denver, Colorado http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA378145 Introduction “Ramps have been used for many years aboard the Navy ships of many countries to reduce takeoff run distance and wind-over-deck (WOD) require- ments, as well as to increase the aircraft takeoff gross weight capability over that of a flat deck carrier. Under the Joint Strike Fighter program, an effort has been funded to evaluate various ramp profiles & ramp performance optimization methodologies. Results of these evaluations will be used with an advanced STOVL aircraft to provide the maximum benefit to takeoff performance, while not becoming a design driver for landing gear or adversely affecting ship designs. The Boeing AV-8B Harrier is a true STOVL aircraft, in that it routinely performs short takeoffs and vertical landings. This allows operations from ships not equipped with catapults or arresting gear and that are considerably smaller than the US large deck carriers. This unique capability is obtained through a group of variable angle nozzles for vectored lift and a reaction control system for stability and control, which uses engine bleed air to provide thrust through several small nozzles located on the aircraft. Many foreign navies operate Harriers from ships equipped with smooth profile ramps. The US Navy has conducted many ship and shore-based tests of smooth and segmented (flat plate) ramp profiles over the years to demonstrate the performance advantages of a ramp-assisted takeoff. Much of this work serves as the basis for our research initiative. Preliminary Work The first step was to collect data from prior flight tests to validate the AV-8B landing gear model. The test data were incomplete because the test aircraft did not have sufficient instrumentation to measure gear/store loads and accelerations. Therefore, criteria were developed which enabled us to compare predict- ed gear load trends and instead of actual gear and structural loads. Preliminary Criteria for Ramp Optimization I. The landing gear shall not compress to full closure at any point during the takeoff. Harrier flight tests have been conducted to within 1/2 inch of full closure with no adverse results. 2. Investigate a segmented ramp versus a smooth profile ramp, and how it could be used with the existing structural and operational requirements of the aircraft. If so, what is the maximum angle change between segments that can be tolerated by the aircraft and aircrew? 3. Resonance effects from segmented ramps on landing gear and wing mounted stores are unknown, and efforts should be taken to break up or reduce these loads. Preliminary Results Preliminary simulation runs have been completed. Test results indicate that the segmented ramp concept shows great promise and could allow ship designers options in building retractable or reconfigurable ramp designs for future STOVL capable ships. Segmented ramp takeoff performance is not diminished as compared with a smooth ramp. Initial results indicate that segmented ramp profiles can be modified to keep the gear loads well within their structural limits. Since the velocity of the aircraft remains fairly constant while it is on the ramp, an equally distributed (same length) segment pattern generates a recurring load on the landing gear at each joint. If the frequency of these inputs is close to the natural frequency of the gear, or transmitted through the aircraft structure to a wing store, a resonance condition could be excited. This will be investigated at in more detail in the coming months. Preliminary Conclusions The smooth and segmented ramp profiles have demonstrated significant performance gains over a field or flat deck ship takeoff. Work will continue over the next several months to expand & refine the optimization criteria and investigate various ramp profiles and quantify their benefit to aircraft performance.” )LJXUHV 9LHZVRIPHDQ )LJXUH VWUHDPOLQHV RYHU4(& URXQGHG 1RUPDOLVHG GHFNHGJH YHORFLW\ YLHZHGIURP https://www.researchgate. net/profile/Michael_Kelly65/ publication/311582264_The_Queen_ Elizabeth_Class_Aircraft_Carriers_Airwake VWDUERDUG _Modelling_and_Validation_for_ASTOVL_Flight _Simulation/links/584ec1b008aecb6bd8d00466/ The-Queen-Elizabeth-Class-Aircraft-Carriers- Airwake-Modelling-and-Validation-for \ P -ASTOVL-Flight-Simulation.pdf \ P LHFHQWUH OLQH DQG \ P )ORZUHPDLQV ODUJHO\ DWWDFKHGWR WKHURXQGHG OHDGLQJHGJHV RIWKHGHFN WKHVNLMXPS H[FHSWDWWKH VKDUS LQWHUVHFWLRQ RIWKHWZR VIDEO F-35 Pilot talks from the deck of the QEC Carrier BAE Systems 14 Jul 2014 BAE Systems' F-35 Pilot Peter Kosogorin talks from the deck of the QEC Carrier. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9bq0mVk_3qc Carrier countdown 30 June 2014 Tim Robinson 850feet+toendof the ski jump for “...Not your father’s ski-jump STO on CVF The QE-class’s ski-jump, too, has been carefully designed and engineered from the beginning — drawing on BAE’s Harrier heri- tage. Says Atkinson: “We had to go back into the archives and talk to people who had actually been involved with trials with the 850 Sea Harrier and Harrier to make sure we understood the history of ski-jump ramp development. The aircraft carrier ski-jump is a UK innovation and something the UK is very proud of.” The QEC’s ski-jump is longer (200ft) than the Invincible class (150ft) and designed so that the aircraft has all three (including the nose) wheels in contact right up until the point where the aircraft leaves 800 the deck — giving positive nose wheel authority throughout. Additionally, the F-35Bs smart flight control system ‘knows’ when it is going up a ramp and will pre-position the control surfaces and effectors to launch at the optimum angle to avoid pitch-up or down....” http://aerosociety.com/News/Insight-Blog/2300/Carrier-countdown 750 http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7369/9929674624_53b0df94ae_o.png Blue Sky OPS 26 April 2012 AIR International F-35 Lightning II http://militaryrussia.ru/forum/download/file.php?id=28256 Mark Ayton spoke with Peter Wilson, a former Royal Navy Sea Harrier pilot and now STOVL lead test pilot at NAS Patuxent River ...Pilot’s View The author was keen to hear what the F-35 is like to fly particularly at takeoff which always shows dramatic acceler- ation. Peter Wilson explained: “The take-off itself is unremarkable, in afterburner the aeroplane accelerates dramatic- ally, but it’s comparable with legacy fighters, and very weight dependent.”...... Nine Hops During STOVL testing in February 2010, Peter Wilson flew nine sorties from NAS Patuxent River in about four hours, all of which were less than 5 minutes in duration. Each sortie carried a relatively low fuel load allowing Peter to take off, and fly around for a brief period to ensure the fuel was at the right level in preparation for a landing test. “The highlights on the day were the take-offs. I took off as slow as 50 knots [92km/h] with the STOVL mode engaged, ac- celerated out to the normal pattern speed of 150 knots [276km/h], turned downwind, and positioned ready for a vert- ical landing,” he said...... F-35B Take-off Options The F-35B STOVL variant has a range of take-off options using different modes to suit the basing. Take-offs from a ship, with either a flat deck or one with a ski jump, are also possible with a mode for each scenario. These are short take-off scenarios that can be achieved at speeds as low as 50kts with a deck or ground run of no more than a 200ft (60m). In the same mode, a take-off as fast as 150 knots is possible if the weight of the aircraft requires that speed. If the aircraft is light it can take off at a slow speed and faster when heavy. Take-off at speeds as low as 5, 10, 15, 20kts (9, 18, 27 and 36km/h) are also possible, each of which is effectively a vertical take-off while moving forward. There are different ways of rotating the aircraft in STOVL mode, including the usual ‘pull on the stick’. Other ways are by pressing a button or programming a ground distance required after which, the aircraft control law initiates the rotation and selects the ideal angle for climb-out. F-35Bs BF-01 and BF-02 are the only B-models currently undertaking STOVL testing and therefore performing take-offs in STOVL mode. Peter Wilson commented: “We have found a remarkable similarity between BF-01 and BF-02 which gives us the confidence to move on and get more aeroplanes [BF-04 followed by BF-03] into STOVL mode very soon.” At the time of closing for press in mid-April the first vertical take-off had not taken place...... “It is important for people to understand the reason that this aircraft exists is not as a science project set around take-off and landing, it exists to bring the most amazing range of sensors that have ever been put together on a sin- gle aeroplane, and deploy it to the battlefield reliably and repeatedly.” ,,Ski Jump Ramp Figure 4. Key Ski Jump Ramp Features The ski jump ramp was conceived by a Royal Navy officer in the 1970s and subsequently developed by the UK services, industry and Government as a way of increasing the STO launch payload for the Harrier1,2,3. It has since become an integral part of embarked operations for UK and most maritime STOVL operators. The QEC was designed with a ski-jump ramp from the outset and the shape of the ramp was designed to be optimal for the F-35B STOVL JSF. The ski jump ramp works by imparting an upward vertical velocity and ballistic profile to the aircraft, providing additional time to accelerate to flying speed whilst ensuring it is on a safe trajectory after launch, reducing risk from mis-timed launches with regard to ship motion, reducing pilot workload and giving the pilot more time to diagnose Bumps and plate sags result in increases of loads beyond those achieved on an idealized ramp profile, see Fig. 5. any issues compared to a flat deck STO. The upwards trajectory at ramp exit also allows either a reduction in take- The initial loads analysis, performed using commercially available dynamic software, assumed values for the off length for a given weight, or increased weight (i.e. launch performance) for a fixed take-off distance. The maximum bumps and plate sags, placing them at the worst credible positions on the ramp, i.e. where peak loads additional performance does, however, increase landing gear loads above those of a flat deck STO. The loads occur in the idealized profile. The QEC ski-jump ramp has been built as accurately as possible using conventional increase represents the energy transferred to the aircraft as it translates up the ramp; and if the angle and curvature of shipbuild techniques, however there are practicalities associated with ship-build that results in deviations from the the ramp are increased to obtain greater performance benefit, so are the landing gear loads. This is tolerable up to a pure mathematical profile and it is important to check how they compare to the design assumptions; for example, the point because the gear strength is defined by landing events, the landing loads from which far exceed flat deck STO detail of how the entry to the ski-jump ramp interfaces with the slightly cambered flight deck. The CAD model of loads, therefore the landing gear has the ability to accept increased loads at take-off, but these must be carefully the ski jump ramp has been used to define the shape of features such as ramp entry, light fittings in the QEC ski- controlled because they act as an upper boundary on permissible ramp size and the ramp’s shape needs to be jump ramp and to allow actual weld positions to be used to place bumps, plate sags and/or steps in the dynamic optimized to control the loads across the range of launch weights, speeds and conditions. The minimum safe launch model (Fig. 6). The dynamic model will be further updated with data from laser mapping of the ramp after the ship speed is defined where the ramp exit speed does not result in any rate of descent during the trajectory until the has been floated up and the analyses will be re-run to confirm that the loads metrics continue to be met for the aircraft has transitioned to fully wing-borne flight. This results in the launch profile shown in Fig. 2, with an defined launch conditions and therefore enable the launch parameters for QEC ski-jump launch to be fully defined to inflection point at which criteria for a successful launch are defined and assessed. high confidence, ready to be verified by flight tests during Lightning/QEC First of Class Flight Trials (FOCFT). Figure 2. Ski Jump Ramp Launch http://arc.aiaa.org/doi/ abs/10.2514/6.2013-4267 Figure 6. Dynamic Analysis of Launch Loads Two safe launch criteria derived from legacy STOVL experience have been used for JSF ski-jump launch, of Integration of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter which the more stressing is adopted: (a) achievement of zero sink rate having taken a margin from the WOD (known with the UK QUEEN ELIZABETH Class as Operational WOD); and (b) achieve a defined positive rate of climb using the full value of WOD. Both criteria Figure 5. Potential Load Oscillations at a Step also require a threshold forward acceleration. Optimisation of the QEC ski-jump ramp design (Fig.3) is described in Aircraft Carrier Ref 4. The optimal QEC ramp was assessed to be a 200 foot long 12·5 degree angled ramp with the profile achieved A ski-jump ramp, being a curved surface, consumes deck area that could otherwise be used to park aircraft or by combining a nominal profile based on a quartic fit to an optimum cubic transition plus circular arc, a rounded operate helicopters. A further major consideration for integration of a ramp has therefore been its width, because it step lead in and an elliptic let down (Fig. 4). Performance and landing gear loads data has been generated to needs to be as wide as possible for launch safety purposes while avoiding excess width to preclude aircraft parking demonstrate the resulting capability and compliance with the loads metric, which is defined by consideration of the on the starboard side of the ship. The QEC ski-jump ramp has been designed to ensure that the aircraft will safely maximum load and stroke at the limit load and bottoming of the landing gear after allowing for an engineering launch, with margins, when the aircraft stays within the STO launch safety lines, the criteria for which have been margin. carried forward from previous UK fixed wing aircraft carriers. RAMP UP Deck-mounted ski-jump assembly marks key step toward U.K. carrier-based JSF operations, Aviation Week & Space Technology / 19 Aug 2013 pp.33-34 “As a new phase of ship-borne testing of the F-35B Joint Strike Fighter gets underway on the amphib- ious assault vessel USS Wasp, British shipbuilders are assembling the ski-jump launch ramp on HMS Queen Elizabeth - the first of two new JSF-dedicated aircraft carriers for the Royal Navy. The 200-ft.-long ramp is the longest ever fitted to a carrier and, like the Queen Elizabeth-class car- riers (QEC) themselves, is the first of its type to be purpose-designed from the outset for F-35 operat- ions. Angled at 12.5 deg., the ramp will be 20-ft. high and is designed to reduce the required deck roll on takeoff by up to 50%, or allow an increased payload of up to 20%. The ramp achieves this by boost- ing vertical velocity, giving the aircraft a ballistic launch profile that provides it with additional time to accelerate to flying speed. However; the ski ramp imparts added loads on the landing gear during launch and, because these can be increased by even small variations in the surface of the ramp or by the interface with the deck, developers are paying special attention to the build tolerances. David Atkinson, who leads JSF/QEC integration activities for BAE Systems, says the requirement for build accuracy is even greater than for previous ski jump designs because the F-35 has a wide tricycle gear. This makes it more exposed to variability than the narrower footprint of the tandem main gear of the Harrier, for which the concept was originally conceived in the 1970s. In addition, the center section of the carrier deck is cambered to prevent pooling of water, further complicating the interface with the ramp. "You have to allow for the effect of deck-plate bumps and sags, and when the ship is floated up we will go over it with laser mapping to measure the actual tolerances achieved in build," says Atkinson, who was speaking at the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Aviation 2013 conference in Los Angeles. The ramp has been designed by BAE and Lockheed Martin, rather than the shipbuild- ers, and is configured with two curves. The initial entry or "cubic" curve leads to a let-down or "ellip- se" section that provides the launch point for the aircraft. The ramp's makeup provides a positive climb rate and no more than a zero sink rate if wind-over-deck conditions are less than expected....” “...Onboard the Queen Elizabeth aircraft carriers, the aircraft would take off at its maximum weight of nearly 27 tonnes using a UK-developed ski-jump,...” 2204.62lbs = 1 tonne 59,535lbs = 27 tonnes [Wing Commander Hackett explained] http://content.yudu.com/A219ee/ETSWin12/resources/20.htm ETS winter 2012_13 LIGHTNING STRIKES http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-zLM6-NPZRyE/U0AFvxfVZjI/AAAAAAAAC0I/b8hcjBArqts/s1600/9929674624_636076b854_k.jpg “...The 300-tonne section of ramp, which is 64 metres long and 13 metres wide, is the final exterior piece of the aircraft carrier to be fitted. At its highest point, the take-off ramp is 6 metres above the flight deck, which will allow aircraft to be propelled into the air. The pictures come on the same day as MOD announces that a fourth Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter aircraft has been ordered from Lockheedd Martin. The UK has already taken delivery of 3 Lightning II jets and Royal Navy anand http://www.flickr.com/photos/ RAF pilots are trainingg on the aircraft in the USA. This fourth jet, which is speciaalllly designed to bee a teestt aircrcrar ftf , wiw ll help boost the on-going training available....” qeclasscarriers/10797672293/ https://www.gogovv.uku /ggovo erernmnmennt/nen ws/r/ oyyala -nnava y-y aircraft-c- arrrier-rampipinngg-u-up sizes/o/in/photostream/ The final section of the flight deck of HMS Queen Elizabeth has been fifitttteded ononttoo ththe RoRoyayal NNavyy's's neew aia rcrcraftf carriier 11 Nov 2013 Start of a momentous year for Carrier project 3 Feb 2014 David Downs “...On the upper deck, the catwalks around the edge of the flight deck are being prepared and will shortly be painted with a heat resistant paint scheme. This will survive the ther- mal effects of the exhaust of an F35 jet while hovering on the approach to a vertical land- ing. This work also entails application of the thermal metal spray coating to the edges of the flight deck. This coating system will later be applied across the whole flight deck...... Meanwhile recognising that access to the ship and craneage is much easier while the ship is in the dry dock, served by the Goliath crane, than when afloat in the non-tidal basin, the chance is being taken to install anything that might be difficult to do later. This includes the platform at the stern for the SPN 41 Precision Approach Radar, the seating’s for the Glide Path Cameras and some CCTV cameras. It looks like 2014 is going to be another busy but very interesting year.” hth tp://wwwwww.t.theheeenngiginneeer.cco.o ukuk/h/homome/e/bbllogog//gguueestst--bblol g/g/starart-t off-a-momo enentotousus-y-yeaarr--fofor-r cacarrrrieier-prrojojece t/t 100177939 4.4 artiiclc e##ixxzzzz2s2sGrrXddsvvd CVF HMS Queen Elizabeth Launch Day “...Q. Britain launched the first of two new aircraft carriers July 4. As 04 July 2014 things stand, SDSR will decide whether the second warship goes into operation or is mothballed. What’s the department’s current view? A. It’s really a Royal Navy decision. With the capability procured, it’s a matter of crewing and sustainment. I know the First Sea Lord [the head of the Royal Navy, Adm. Sir George Zambellas] has expressed his preference for two carriers, as has [Defence Secretary Philip Hammond], but it will be up to the Royal Navy to find the budget to be able to crew two vessels for rotating deployment. It’s an operating expense rather than a capital expense. The issue is not to have two carriers on station at one time but to enable a continuous presence....” Interview: Philip Dunne, UK Defence Equipment, Support and Technology Minister 12 Jul 2014 Andrew Chuter http://www.defensenews.com/article/20140712/DEFREG01/307120028/Interview-Philip-Dunne CVF STO Ski Jump Deck F-35B Sim Details Pilot [Pete Kosogorin BAE test pilot: “...STO 800 feet with FULL operational load [F-35B CVF off Ski Jump]...” https://www. youtube.com/watch?v=gxezKrL6apQ https://scontent-a-lax.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfp1/v/t1.0-9/p180x540/1927919_739748076066942_7147152242371506126_n.jpg?oh=df468c203f8845fa9f31cabc9476aa0c&oe=542B1B8D [CVF/F-35B] The Influence of Ship Configuration on the Design of the JSF Ryberg, Eric S. Feb 2002: http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf&AD=ADA399988 - “...UK OPERATIONAL NEEDS The UK requires a Future Joint Combat Aircraft (FJCA) that will be a stealthy, multi-role aircraft to follow on from the Sea Harrier FA1, Harrier GR7, and Harrier T10 operated by the Royal Navy (RN) and Royal Air Force (RAF). The aircraft must be capable of sustained air defensive counter air, suppression of enemy air defenses, combat search and rescue, reconnaissance, and anti-surface warfare missions. While the STOVL JSF is to be evaluated for basic compatibility with INVINCIBLE-class (CVS) carriers, it is unlikely that the aircraft will ever be deployed aboard CVS for any extended periods. Instead, the UK Ministry of Defence (MoD) has initiated development of a future aircraft carrier (CVF) scheduled to enter service at or about the same time as its JSF. The CVF program is currently in its concept development phase, and the ship will be designed for compatibility with the shipboard JSF variant, CV or STOVL, that will be procured for use by the UK's joint air forces. The UK's selection of JSF variant is scheduled to occur during the first half of 2002....” “...Unlike the CV variant, the JSF STOVL variant did not have a spot factor requirement levied upon it. Instead, the ORD specified a spotting requirement in operational terms. The USMC operators required that it be possible to park a total of six STOVL variants aft of the island on an LHA or LHD, such that none fouls the landing area and that any one of them can be moved without first moving any other. This requirement constrains the STOVL variant's wingspan to be no more than 35 ft....” - “...TAKEOFF RAMP COMPATIBILITY Since the UK is a customer for JSF, the STOVL variant will be designed to be compatible with the 12 deg short takeoff (STO) ramp, or ski jump, found on the bows of INVINCIBLE class ships. An aircraft performing a ramp-assisted STO experiences an increased normal load factor, the result of centripetal acceleration applied as the aircraft traverses the curved ramp. While the benefit to aircraft takeoff performance is predominantly a function of the inclination angle at ramp exit, the load on the aircraft is a function of the ramp's radius of curvature, coupled with the geometry and dynamics of the aircraft landing gear. In the design of JSF, structural analyses indicated that the loads predicted for a STO off INVINCIBLE's 12 deg ramp were less severe than other design conditions such as high sink rate landings and rolling over deck obstacles. Hence, the ramp takeoff does not act as a structural design driver. However, changes in ramp profile that lessen its radius of curvature such as an increase in exit angle for a fixed-length ramp, or a decrease in the length of a ramp with the same exit angle, may cause the STO ramp takeoff to become the most severe ground load contributor. Future ships incorporating ramps should account not just for takeoff performance benefits added by the ramp, but also for the impact of added ground loads on any aircraft to use the ramp. Use of high fidelity aircraft simulations would allow the ramp profile to be "tuned" for a particular launch scen- ario, such that the ramp design maximizes aircraft performance gain while minimizing the impact of added ground loads....” 7DNHRIIVDQGLQWKHGHVLJQDQGSURGXFWLRQRIVWUXFWXUHVWKDWOLPLWWKHULVNRI )RUHLJQ2EMHFW'DPDJH )2' WRDQDLUFUDIW7KHUHTXLUHPHQWLQYROYHV GHVLJQSURGXFWLRQDQGGHOLYHU\RIHTXLSPHQWDQDO\VLVDQG GRFXPHQWDWLRQSURGXFWVWRSURYLGHD6NL-XPS7HVW&DSDELOLW\$VROH VRXUFHDFTXLVLWLRQLVUHTXLUHGXQGHUWKHDXWKRULW\RI)$5DQG 86& F GXHWR:)(/¶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https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&tab UHTXLUHPHQW7KH*RYHUQPHQWZLOOFRQVLGHUDOOFDSDELOLW\LQIRUPDWLRQ =core&id=f47e237486e35645cbb89120d6fe6724&_cview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http://www. wfel.com/ ($ & "' , news/wfel-set- http://www.wfel.com/news/archive/ to-soar-after- : ' *!+ ' 2 !"#$ ) # ' latest-american-deal/ $ "& ' " " $$ 3 ,; " ) !"#$ %& ' " "$ # ( )) # % & , "$ ( ) ' *!+ $ '+ ' , ' *!+ ' % " <= >2 & & - $ & ) # )' # ) ""$ $. / #($ $ *! ) ? '" $ " 2 " ) )& &$ )% & $# $ ( "# ,= 0 ! # 0!, " ' $ "' 0!1 )" & "$ > " ' 6 "2 # ) 2 $ & *!3 " % $ 0!$ ( ", 4/ 22 ) ) , <= 0!)& ' 2 " " ' 2 #($M ' ' $ & & ) $ $$ 2 $ " 2 ' # ) ) M) & & , 2 '$$ $" )' " '" , ) $ " '" # ? " " & 0!& $ " $ " ) 2 & & $ 2 '$ , $ ( " & 6" $ , Ski Jump Comparison: & = *! ' & " ) >2 & ) # ) 150 ft length/15 feet high = Invincible Class '" '"" & " @4A/ , ) ' " !./ "2 6$ : " ,=whilst 200 ft length/20 ft high is CVF Class 6$ ) " ) # ($, http://ww2.dcmilitary.com/stories/070909/tester_28153.shtml “The mock ski-jump is 150-feet long, with a 15-foot high “lip” for aircraft launch. These shore-based ski- jump takeoffs will be conducted at varying airspeeds prior to the first UK ship detachment with the F-35B.” A jump ahead Designed, developed and built by WFEL, a leader in the design GÜNTER ENDRES http://www.janes.com/images/assets/271/ 54271/DSEi_Show_Daily_Day_1.pdf 2015 and manufacture of tactical Peter Wilson, test pilot and The Lockheed Martin F-35B military bridges, the £2 million ski jump project lead, added: Lightning II supersonic short jump was the brainchild of "Aircraft BF-04 performed well take-off and vertical landing engineer Greg Roney. It is a 250- and I can’t wait until we’re aircraft made aviation history ton land-based structure that conducting F-35 ski jumps in June, when it took off at replicates the runway of aircraft from the deck of the Queen the Naval Air Station (NAS) in carriers operated by the British Elizabeth carrier. Until then, the Patuxent River, Maryland, from and Italian navies, both of which de-risking that we’re able to a WFEL ski jump, the first of its will be acquiring the F-35B. achieve now during phase I of type to be built anywhere in the WFEL chief executive Ian our ski jump testing will equip world. Wilson said: "We have a strong us with valuable data we’ll use This first ever launch from heritage in applying our to fuel our phase II efforts." a ski jump marked the start specialised design and The F-35 Lightning II is a of an initial testing phase to manufacturing skills to high- single-seat, single-engine, demonstrate the aircraft’s quality and technically strike fighter that incorporates ability to take off and land challenging products. We made a low-observable (stealth) safely, with the US-UK team strategic move to expand our technologies, defensive avionics, continuing the trials over engineering expertise with the advanced sensor fusion, the summer before the first ski jump after consultation with internal and external weapons, shipboard ski jump launch from the US military, whom we’ve been and an advanced prognostic HMS Queen Elizabeth. working with since the 1980s." maintenance capability. Q F-35B STOVL: http://www.pprune.org/military-aircrew/478767-no-cats-flaps-back-f35b-51.html 2nd Jun 2012 ‘Engines’ “The UK F-35B is required, and is perfectly able to, use a 'STO' technique to get airborne. The pilot will select 'powered lift' mode before it starts its take off run, & the aircraft will be partially jet borne & partially wing borne when it leaves the ramp. At the appropriate point as it flies away, the pilot selects back into 'conventional flight' mode. The landing gear is fine. What you see on the video is the tyre flexing. The Harrier nose leg was massive because it was a 'bicycle' gear layout with the nose wheel taking around 50% of the weight of the aircraft. The F-35 has a conventional gear, with the front leg taking around 10% of the load. Oh, and I can testify that Harrier landing gears (outriggers & nose legs both) flexed plenty during deck ops. Stopped them breaking. & The last few feet as a jet powered lift aircraft nears a surface are both complex and critical. There is the ever present risk of Hot Gas Ingestion (HGI) as well as quite complex flow around and under the aircraft that can lead to 'suck down' and/or loss and deterioration of control. The Harrier had some quite challenging characteristics in this area, although the fact that it was able to enter service without much artificial stability augmentation was a great achievement by the people who designed it. You probably know that a key to this was controlling the 'fountain' of air generated under the aircraft, hence the use of strakes, airbrake and on the AV-8B, a separate air dam. The best way to avoid problems in this area for the Harrier was to land 'firmly', and so get through the critical 'near to ground' area as fast as practicable. Hence the sometimes firm landings. Although it's worth noting that the vertical velocity of these was still way less than is normally used in 'cat and trap' operations. Fast forward to F-35B. The team have used design tools and test rigs that didn't exist in the 60s when the Harrier team did their work. That has given the F-35 team a much better understanding of how the jet operates close to the ground, and this has paid off. You'll see from the videos that they are using the in- board weapon bay doors as 'strakes' during vertical landings. Another major difference from Harrier are the flight controls. F-35B has a 'rate command' system, which reduces pilot workload, but it did, in the early days, lead to some 'rebound' on landing – look up some of the X-35 videos that are out there. This appears to have been solved now.” Ski Jump Pax River http://i65.tinypic.com/11ljtzs.jpg NAS Patuxent River Ski Jump + Run Up being in total 908 ft from right to left “...the AM-2 matting ... doubles as the run-up for a test “ski-jump” used in conjunction with Date: 20 Oct 2013 JSF testing for the British Royal Navy. The AM-2 matting and the 12-degree ski-jump ramp were installed at the center-field area last month [May 2009]....” EAF enables JSF landing anywhere, everywhere | Jun 29, 2009 http://www.navair.navy.mil/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.NAVAIRNewsStory&id=4144 SKI JUMP START “'ENGINES': "...Trust me on this, loads are not the problem for ski jump, it's the load profile and whether the leg closes, as John Farley has already pointed out. One of the many insanely great features of the ski jump launch is that is a fairly gentle manoeuvre, both aerodynamically and structurally. It's the closest thing I have ever encountered to 'something for nothing'....” http://www.pprune.org/archive/index.php/t-478767-p-5.html http://ww2.dcmilitary.com/stories/070909/tester_28153.shtml “The mock ski-jump is 150-feet long, with a 15-foot high “lip” for aircraft launch. These shore-based ski-jump takeoffs will be conducted at varying airspeeds prior to the first UK ship detachment with the F-35B.” “The mock ski-jump is 150-feet long, with a 15-foot high “lip” for aircraft launch. These shore-based ski-jump takeoffs will be conducted at varying airspeeds prior to the first UK ship detachment with the F-35B.” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9dX4PyA2428 NAS Patuxent River Ski Jump July 2012 [Invincible Class Size] “Ski Jump Testing 2014” “...Although the AM-2 matting is serving its pur- pose as vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) pads and a 1,900 x 96-foot runway for the EAF/STOVL testing, it also doubles as the run-up for a test “ski-jump” used in conjunction with JSF test- ing for the British Royal Navy. The AM-2 matting and the 12-degree ski- jump ramp were installed at the centerfield area last month [May 2009]....” EAF enables JSF landing anywhere, everywhere | Jun 29, 2009 http://www.navair.navy.mil/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.NAVAIRNewsStory&id=4144 Pax River Prepares for F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter http://somd.com/news/headlines/2009/10716.shtml NAVAIR Oct 29, 2009 - “PATUXENT RIVER NAVAL AIR STATION (Oct. 29, 2009) - A new jet aircraft will soon be calling Naval Air Station (NAS) Patuxent River home. The F-35 Lightning II, Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) will arrive from Fort Worth, Texas to continue its System Development and Demonstration (SDD) testing efforts at NAS Patuxent River. Since early 2002, NAS Patuxent River has been getting ready for the arrival of the F-35 with the addition of new facilities and equipment required to support the testing of this new aircraft...... The F-35B and F-35C will be tested and developed at NAS Patuxent River, which will host a total of eight aircraft at the peak of the testing program. The Centerfield Complex will be used to test these capabilities including vertical land- ings on pads mimicking those found on land and on the LHD class of ships; short-distance takeoffs using the ski jump which is similar to those found on U.K. carriers; and flight per- formance testing on the EAF. Expeditionary Airfields are mobile systems that allow U.S. Marines to quickly build functioning airfields in mission critical areas that do not support a standard-use airfield. These areas allow the JSF to perform missions in any terrain. Add- itional testing activities to occur at NAS Patuxent River include carrier approach and land- ing flights, software and aircraft systems development, and aircraft certification testing. The JSF SDD program operations at NAS Patuxent River are expected to continue through 2013 although the F-35's presence at the Naval Air Station will likely extend well into the future. Aircraft equipment and systems requirements continually evolve, resulting in the continued need for follow-on test and evaluation.” Pax ski jump readied for future F-35B Lightning II launches 22 May 2014 Sarah Ehman Atlantic Test Ranges Business Communications http://www.dcmilitary.com/article/20140522/NEWS14/140529960/pax-ski-jump-readied-for-future-f-35b-lightning-ii-launches - “Thanks to a partnership between the Atlantic Test Ranges (ATR) and the F-35 Lightning II Pax River Integrated Test Force (ITF), the Joint Strike Fighter took one step closer this Spring to making its debut on international ships. The Pax River ITF partnered with ATR’s Geomatics and Metrology team to perform a high fidelity survey of the shore-based ski jump at Naval Air Station Patuxent River’s center airfield. The survey is a prerequisite to future F-35B flight testing by the Pax River ITF, the United Kingdom and Italy. The shore- based ski jump at centerfield was built in the United Kingdom, divided into sections, then transported and reassembled at Pax River. “Launching off our Pax ski-jump paves the way to F-35Bs launching off our international partner ships that feature ski-jumps,” said Bob Nantz, the Pax River F-35 ITF external environment and performance lead. “The significance of the Pax ski-jump shape is connected to aircraft loads & performance modeling. Ideally, the loads will never limit the launch weight or speed, thus allowing the maximum performance benefit.” Together, Fred Hancock, Sung Han and Warren Kerr, each with ATR Geomatics and Metrology, employed electronic differential leveling and total station measurement techniques to check for drift in construction and determine precise deviations in both vertical and horizontal components of the ramp. “We captured hundreds of elevation readings, determining the relative vertical difference between points,” Hancock said. “We also obtained precise angular distance measurements to determine if the ramp edges were parallel to the center line. This helped us to know whether the ramp was at all skewed.” Hancock noted that the team achieved readings accurate to within one millimeter — approximately the thickness of a credit card. “The razor-sharp accuracy of the Geomatics team’s survey is a key part of the process leading to future ski-jump operations at sea,” Nantz said.” - http://www.dcmilitary.com/storyimage/DC/20140522/NEWS14/140529960/AR/0/AR-140529960.jpg - “U.S. Navy photo/Jennifer Amber The Atlantic Test Ranges Geomatics and Metrology team, from left, Fred Hancock, Sung Han and Warren Kerr survey the ski jump ramp that was assembled at Naval Air Station Patuxent River in 2009 to document potential deviations from the original design plan.” JSF programme to proceed with UK-specific land-based carrier trials Gareth Jennings 09 Jul 2012 http://www.janes.com/events/exhibitions/farnborough-2012/news/july-10/JSF-programme-proceed.aspx - -“The Program Office for the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) is to short- ly commence UK-specific trials for carrier operations of the short take-off/vertical landing (STOVL) variant F-35B, it was announced at the Farnborough Airshow 2012. Speaking on 10 July, BAE Sys- tems lead STOVL test pilot Peter 'Wizzer' Wilson said that 'ski-jump' launch trials will begin at Nav- al Air Station (NAS) Patuxent River, Maryland, in the near future, while work on the shipborne roll- ing vertical landing (SRVL) is also ongoing. "A 'ski jump' is in place at Pax River that is based on the one [formerly fitted to HMS] Illustrious," he said, adding: "If we can get a few launches in over the next 12 months or so to help de-risk the programme, that would be something that [the UK Ministry of Defence (MoD)] would be interested in." Wilson said the advantage of the 'ski jump' launch method is in the extra time it gives the pilot on take-off. "The real benefit is one of timing. Once airborne you are flying upwards rather than horizontal, and this gives you extra time to think if something should go wrong," he explained. In addition, Wilson noted that the 'ski jump' saves approximately 100 to 150 ft of deck run over the standard 'flat top' carrier deck. "Everything we have seen in modelling is that [the 'ski jump'] is the best way to get this aircraft airborne," he said. Wilson noted that the lift-fan door behind the cockpit does not affect the aircraft's handling when open for the landing and take-off phases of flight. "There are no issues in terms of drag," he said. "We can open [the door] up to speeds of 250 kt and you don't feel a thing in the cockpit." With regard the SVRL landing technique, which is designed to increase the aircraft's fuel and/or weapons bring back capacity, Wilson said that the Program Office is continuing the sup- port the UK-specific work in this field, although he added that the UK government has not yet decided if it will adopt this technique on the two Queen Elizabeth-class ships (CVF) when they enter service....” ¿QGLQJRXWKRZWRÀ\DQGFDUU\RXWFHU- RIVLPXODWLQJ)&WRDLUFUDIWFDUULHUV Ship Shape — tain maneuvers, and working out various with catapults and arrestor gear, and À\LQJWHFKQLTXHVVXFKDVVKLSERUQHUROO- has been used for assessment of various F-35/QEC simulator ing vertical landing. We’ve brought to- ÀLJKWFRQWUROGHYHORSPHQWVIRU)&WR gether a cross-section of individuals to &91DQGZKLOHWKH8.ZDVFRQVLGHULQJ SEPTEMBER 2014 PAUL E EDEN do that, from very experienced Harrier D&9FRQYHUWHG4(FODVVVKLSIRU)& SLORWVWR861DY\FRQYHQWLRQDO)SL- to QE.” “…Pete ‘Kos’ Kosogorin, a BAE Systems ORWVDQGDOVR5R\DO1DY\DQGRWKHUDLU Unlike the more familiar full mission F-35B experimental test pilot, recent- force pilots who have no shipborne or VLPXODWRUWKH)FDUULHUVLPIRFXVHV ly visited HMS Queen Elizabeth, under 6729/>VKRUWWDNHRϑYHUWLFDOODQGLQJ@ on the near-ship environment, primarily construction at Rosyth, Fife. Standing in experience, to ensure the design is opti- for the assessment of launch and recov- WKHVKLS¶VÀ\LQJFRQWUROFHQWHU )/<&2 mized for all levels of ability and all lev- ery operations, including circuits around he commented: “It’s really exciting be- els of scale.” WKHVKLS,WXVHVD/RFNKHHG0DUWLQ) cause it looks so familiar. I can see how six-degrees-of-freedom mathematical vast, how wide and how long the deck is, HARRIER LEGACY PRGHOYDOLGDWHGDJDLQVWH[WHQVLYHÀLJKW and it looks familiar because of the sim- &RPSDULVRQVDUHIUHTXHQWO\PDGHEH- WHVWGDWD D4(&VKLSPRWLRQPRGHOSUR- ulator work we’ve been doing at Warton, tween the F-35B and the Harrier; they YLGHGE\WKH$LUFUDIW&DUULHU$OOLDQFH in terms of integrating the F-35 into the are usually misleading. But in the case $&$ EDVHGRQWDQNWHVWGDWD DQGD ship using the shipborne rolling landing RI%$(6\VWHPV¶)FDUULHUÀLJKWVLP- FRPSXWDWLRQDOÀXLGG\QDPLFV &)' VKLS technique, the normal vertical landing XODWRUHDUOLHUZRUNZLWKWKHOHJDF\MHW DLUZDNHÀRZ¿HOGWKDWLVEHLQJIXUWKHUGH- DQGVKRUWWDNHRϑRSHUDWLRQV7KDWVLPX- and Invincible class ships has helped lay veloped and validated by the University lation work is part of a wider carrier inte- WKHIRXQGDWLRQVIRU:DUWRQ¶VVWFHQWX- RI/LYHUSRRO JUDWLRQHϑRUWDW6DPOHVEXU\DQG:DUWRQ ry simulator design. As David Atkinson, Realism has been further enhanced WKDWKDVDOORZHGXVWR¿QGHϒFLHQF\DQG )&DUULHU,QWHJUDWLRQ/HDGDW%$( by the recent addition of a landing sig- savings in the design of the carrier, its 6\VWHPVH[SODLQVWKHUHVXOWLVDÀH[LEOH QDORϒFHU¶V /62 VWDWLRQ7KH/62¶VUROH deck, the array and the systems that as- system with capabilities beyond F-35B: will be similar to that aboard an Invinci- sist the pilot in approach and landing.” ³:H¶YHEHHQFRQGXFWLQJÀLJKWVLPXODWLRQ ble class ship, but according to Atkinson A member of the F-35 Integrated at Warton for over 50 years for many there will be “a larger workstation and 7DVN)RUFHDW1DYDO$LU6WDWLRQ3DWX[HQW SURMHFWVLQFOXGLQJVLPXODWLQJ+DUULHUV more sophisticated situational awareness River, Maryland, for the past four years, operating from the recently retired In- aids and information displays”. Kosogorin explains more about the sim- YLQFLEOH&96FODVV7KH)FDUULHUÀLJKW Describing the simulator’s design XODWRU¶VUROH ³7KHVLPZRUNKDVQ¶WMXVW simulator has been developed to sup- DQGKRZWKH/62VWDWLRQLVLQWHJUDW- EHHQDERXWGHYHORSLQJWKHÀLJKWFRQWUROV port the integration of the F-35 to the ed, Atkinson continues: “From a physical software in the aircraft, it’s also about QE class ships. It is, however, capable point of view it has a hydraulic motion 1 platform within a dome and uses mo- shipborne rolling vertical landing maneu- and concerns through the simulation tion-cueing algorithms to enable the pilot vers and the supporting systems; visu- work, but thankfully it also provides an to feel aircraft motion in a very realis- DOODQGLQJDLGV ÀLJKWGHFNOLJKWVJOLGH- ideal environment to visualize problems, WLFZD\GHVSLWHUHPDLQLQJYHU\¿UPO\RQ SDWKLQGLFDWRUV )%KHOPHWPRXQWHG explain them and rapidly show how po- WKHJURXQG+LJKVSHFL¿FDWLRQSURMHF- GLVSOD\V\PERORJ\/62VLWXDWLRQDO tential solutions would work. Between tors are used, with a very high-resolu- awareness aids and standard operating WKH0R'$&$DQGRXUVHOYHVZHKDYH WLRQSURMHFWRUIRUWKHSLORW¶VIRUZDUG¿HOG procedures. LGHQWL¿HGDQGUHVROYHGDQXPEHURILV- RIYLHZ,WKDVDVHFRQGSURMHFWHGVFUHHQ “We’ve helped the MoD and the VXHVRYHUWKHSOXV\HDUVWKDWZH¶YH GLVSOD\WRUHSUHVHQWSDUWRIWKH)/<&2± $&$RSWLPL]HDQGJDLQFRQ¿GHQFHLQ been working together using the Warton WKH/62ZRUNVWDWLRQDWZKLFKDSLORWFDQ their designs and likewise for some simulator.”… RSHUDWHDVDQ/62LQWHUDFWLQJZLWKWKH changes we’ve made to the F-35B, to «7KHSRWHQWLDORI:DUWRQ¶V)FDUUL- SLORWÀ\LQJWKHVLPXODWRUZKLOHZDWFKLQJ allow shipborne rolling vertical landings HUVLPXODWRUWREHJLQWKHGH¿QLWLRQRID WKHDLUFUDIWPDQHXYHULQUHDOWLPH7KH WREHFRQGXFWHG7KHVHDUHXQLTXHWR future training syllabus even as its test FRPELQHGPRWLRQVLPXODWRUDQG)/<&2 the QE class and involve a rolling vertical work continues is obvious and Atkinson representation have proved very valu- landing onto the ship’s ‘runway’ with 30 FRQ¿UPVLWVUROHQRWRQO\LQSLORWWUDLQ- able while developing maneuvers, oper- to 40kt of overtake, allowing increased LQJEXWDOVRIRUÀLJKWGHFNFUHZ ³:H ating procedures and display layouts.” bring-back weight performance for the have already used the simulator to in- aircraft, which should pay dividends on form the training syllabuses and help SIMULATOR AMBITION operations,” says Atkinson…. RXUFXVWRPHUVXQGHUVWDQGWKHEHQH¿WV $OORZLQJSLORWVWRÀ\)%DSSURDFKHV «2YHUPRUHWKDQDGHFDGHRIZRUN of immersive simulation to their training LQFRRSHUDWLRQZLWKDQ/62DVWKH\ZLOO :DUWRQ¶V)FDUULHUVLPXODWRUKDVLGHQ- SURFHVVHVIRUWKHSLORWDQG/62:KDWLV on the real carrier at sea, is already de- WL¿HGDQGKHOSHG¿[YDULRXVLVVXHVDV abundantly clear is that simulation tech- livering immense value to the program, well as facilitating the safe expansion of nology is here to stay and continues to but Atkinson says that the simulator is WKHRSHUDWLQJHQYHORSH³7KH4(FODVV increase its role in development and scheduled for much greater capability. KDVDQLPPHQVHÀLJKWGHFNZLWKVWDWH WUDLQLQJEDVHGRQFRVWHϑHFWLYHQHVVDQG ³2XUDPELWLRQLVIRUWKHVLPXODWRUWREH of-the-art visual landing aids,” says At- an ever-increasing ability to emulate the used for wider purposes than pilot and NLQVRQ³7KH)LVDKXJHO\FDSDEOH real world.” /62LQWHUDFWLRQV«´« WKJHQHUDWLRQDLUFUDIWWKDWSLORWV¿QG 7DNHRϑUXQLQIHHWIURP «:RUNWRGDWHKDVGULYHQPRGL¿FDWLRQ HDV\WRÀ\WRDVKLSDQGZHEHOLHYHWKDW DQGUH¿QHPHQWLQFDUULHUÀLJKWGHFNGH- there are lots of good ways to operate 4(&IRUOLJKWO\ORDGHG)% sign, aircraft design and operational the F-35B to a ship the size of the QE, 7DNHRϑUXQLQIHHWIURP procedures. “We’ve conducted a num- with our role being to optimize the de- 4(&IRUIXOO\ORDGHG)% EHURIWULDOVWRGHYHORSWKH)%WR4(& signs and procedures to maximize per- AEROSPACE TESTING INTERNATIONAL YHUWLFDOODQGLQJVNLMXPSODXQFKDQG IRUPDQFH:H¶YHLGHQWL¿HGDIHZLVVXHV September 2014 2 Roles )%/LJKWQLQJ,, /LJKWQLQJ,,KDVEHHQGHVLJQHGIURPWKHRXWVHWWRFDUU\RXWDZLGHUDQJHRI PLVVLRQW\SHVDEOHWRXVHLWVYHU\ORZREVHUYDEOHFKDUDFWHULVWLFVWRSHQHWUDWH http://www.raf.mod.uk/equipment/f35jointstrikefighter.cfm ,QWHJUDWHG$LU'HIHQFH6\VWHPVDQGVWULNHDQXPEHURIW\SHVRIWDUJHWV,QD 7KH)%/LJKWQLQJ,,ZLOOSODFHWKH8.DWWKHIRUHIURQWRIILJKWHUWHFKQRORJ\ SHUPLVVLYHHQYLURQPHQW/LJKWQLQJ,,LVDEOHWRFDUU\ZHDSRQVRQH[WHUQDO JLYLQJWKH5R\DO$LU)RUFHDWUXHPXOWLUROHDOOZHDWKHUGD\DQGQLJKW S\ORQVDVZHOODVLQWKHLQWHUQDOZHDSRQED\V7KLVZLOODOORZDPD[LPXP FDSDELOLW\DEOHWRRSHUDWHIURPZHOOHVWDEOLVKHGODQGEDVHVGHSOR\HG ZHDSRQSD\ORDGRI3DYHZD\,9$,0&$05$$0$,0Z ORFDWLRQVRUWKH4XHHQ(OL]DEHWK&ODVV$LUFUDIW&DUULHUV $65$$0DQGDPLVVLRQLVHGPPJXQSRG$ (QJLQHV 3UDWW :KLWQH\) 7KUXVW OEV 7KH/LJKWQLQJ,,GHVLJQDSSOLHVVWHDOWKWHFKQRORJ\PDQXIDFWXULQ7 JWHFKQLTXHV 0D[VSHHG /HQJWK P PD[LPXP ZHDSRQ SD\ORDG DQGWRPLQLPLVHLWVUDGDUVLJQDWXUHWKHDLUIUDPHKDVLGHQWLFDOVZHHSDQJOHV 0DFK RI 3DYHZD\ ,9 IRUWKHOHDGLQJDQGWUDLOLQJHGJHVRIWKHZLQJVDQGWDLODQGLQFRUSRUDWHV 0D[DOWLWXGH $,0& $05$$0 6SDQ P IW $LUFUHZ $,0 $65$$0 D VORSLQJVLGHVIRUWKHIXVHODJHDQGWKHFDQRS\ PLVVLRQLVHG PP JXQ SRG $UPDPHQW 3DYHZD\,9$05$$0$65$$0 7KHDGYDQFHGVHQVRUVXLWHRIWKH/LJKWQLQJ,,LVWKHJUHDWHVWVWHSFKDQJHLQ )XWXUH$UPDPHQW 6WRUP6KDGRZ63($50(7(25PP*XQ3RG FDSDELOLW\WKDWWKH8.KDVQRWSUHYLRXVO\SRVVHVVHG7KH$3*LVDQ$FWLYH (OHFWURQLFDOO\6FDQQHG$UUD\PXOWLIXQFWLRQUDGDUZLWK6\QWKHWLF$SHUWXUH 7KH/RFNKHHG0DUWLQ)-RLQW6WULNH)LJKWHUZLOOEHNQRZQLQ8.VHUYLFHDV 5DGDUDQG*URXQG0RYLQJ7DUJHW,QGLFDWLRQFDSDELOLWLHV7DUJHWLQJ WKH/LJKWQLQJ,,/RFNKHHG0DUWLQLVWKHSULPHFRQWUDFWRUEXWWKH8.LVWKHRQO\ LQIRUPDWLRQFDQDOVREHVXSSOLHGE\DQ(OHFWUR2SWLFDO7DUJHWLQJ6\VWHP /HYHOSDUWQHUZLWKWKH86$QXPEHURI%ULWLVKFRPSDQLHVLQFOXGLQJ%$( ZKLFKSURYLGHVORQJUDQJHGHWHFWLRQDQGSUHFLVLRQWDUJHWLQJE\HPSOR\LQJ 6\VWHPVDQG5ROOV5R\FHZLOOKDYHVLJQLILFDQWLQGXVWULDOZRUNVKDUHLQ WKHUPDOLPDJLQJODVHUWUDFNLQJDQGPDUNLQJGHJUHHVLWXDWLRQDO FRQVWUXFWLRQDQGGHYHORSPHQWRIWKHDLUFUDIW7KH/LJKWQLQJ,,ZLOOSURYLGH8. DZDUHQHVVLVDLGHGE\WKH(OHFWUR2SWLFDO'LVWULEXWHG$SHUWXUH6\VWHP 'HIHQFHZLWKDWK*HQHUDWLRQ ORZREVHUYDEOHVXSHUVRQLFHQKDQFHGGDWD /LJKWQLQJ,,VDGYDQFHGPLVVLRQV\VWHPVZLOODOVRSURYLGHQDYLJDWLRQ IXVLRQ PXOWLUROHDOOZHDWKHUGD\DQGQLJKWDLUFUDIWWKDWZLOOKDYHWKHDELOLW\WR LQIRUPDWLRQPLVVLOHZDUQLQJDQGLQIUDUHGVHDUFKDQGWUDFNFDSDELOLWLHV RSHUDWHIURPODQGEDVHVDVZHOODVWKH4XHHQ(OL]DEHWK&ODVVFDUULHUVWKH ILUVWRIZKLFKLVGXHWRDFFHSW/LJKWQLQJ,,RQWRKHUGHFNLQ7KLVEDVLQJ /LJKWQLQJ,,ZLOOSODFHWKH5$)DWWKHIRUHIURQWRIILJKWHUWHFKQRORJ\DQGZLOO IOH[LELOLW\ZLOOJLYH8.'HIHQFHDWUXO\MRLQWH[SHGLWLRQDU\&RPEDW$LUFDSDELOLW\ JLYHLWDWUXHPXOWLUROHDLUFUDIWWKDWZLOOVXUSDVVWKHPDMRULW\RIRWKHUZHDSRQV ZHOOLQWRWKH¶V7KH5$)LVWKHOHDGVHUYLFHIRUWKHRSHUDWLRQRI/LJKWQLQJ V\VWHPVLQSURGXFWLRQWRGD\RUHQYLVDJHGLQWKHIRUHVHHDEOHIXWXUH/LJKWQLQJ ,,DQGOLNHWKH+DUULHUEHIRUHWKH-RLQW/LJKWQLQJ,,)RUFHZLOOEHPDQQHGE\ ,,DQG7\SKRRQDLUFUDIWZLOOPDNHXSWKH)DVW-HWHOHPHQWVRI)XWXUH)RUFH ERWK5$)DQG51SHUVRQQHO Powering the Lightning II hovering. He says Lockheed Mar- based on distance: we know April 2012 Chris Kjelgaard tin’s original X-35 concept dem- where the aircraft is spotted [be- onstrator featured doors between IRUHLWVWDUWVLWVWDNHRϑUXQ@DQG “…According to Jones, the roll the engine casing and the roll- where it should start its actual posts themselves are variable- post ducts which could be closed rotation,” explained Rusnok. “Un- area nozzles which are situat- when the aircraft was not hov- OLNHD+DUULHUZKLFKODXQFKHVRϑ ed in the lower part of each inner ering, but in production aircraft WKHHQGRIWKHVKLSÀDWWKH) wing section and act to provide there are no such doors and by- rotates at about 225 feet from roll control for the F-35B while it SDVVDLUÀRZLVFRQVWDQWO\VHQWWR the bow, sits on two wheels until is in hover mode. In order to do the ducts. The only way to con- it gets to the end of the ship and this, the roll-post ducts direct by- trol roll-post thrust is via the DFWXDOO\WDNHVRϑDPXFKGLϑHU- pass air from the engine to the ÀDSGRRUVLQWKHERWWRPRIWKH ent process to a Harrier. From a roll posts, which drive the air out wing….” pilot perspective, you lose some through the bottom of each wing. KWWS PLOLWDU\UXVVLDUXIRUXPGRZQORDG¿OHSKS"LG sight of the front of the ship; in a In the F-35B, 3,700lb (16.46kN) of Harrier you can see all the deck. thrust in the form of bypass air is Jumping Jack Flash But that’s all part of optimising directed out to the two roll posts July 2014 unknown author DOEDHURSODQHWRJHWRϑ while hovering. $,5,QWHUQDWLRQDO)6SHFLDO(GLWLRQ the ship compared to the Harrier, Each roll-post assembly fea- ³«672LQJ« which is only 16,000 to 25,000lb.” WXUHVDSDLURIÀDSW\SHGRRUV …There are three ways to con- :LWKVWLFN672WKHSLORWFRQ- in the bottom of the wing, con- GXFWDVKRUWWDNHRϑ 672 LQWKH WUROVWKHWDNHRϑE\SXOOLQJEDFN trolled by the FADEC. Jones says )% VWLFN672EXWWRQ672± on the stick, holding it there and these titanium doors are con- DQGDXWR672³7KDW¶VDFRP- then rotating to the optimal pitch trolled by rotary actuators which SOHWHO\DXWRPDWHGZD\WR672 DQJOHWRÀ\Rϑ,QEXWWRQ672 allow fully variable opening, pro- WKHDLUFUDIWRϑWKHÀLJKWGHFN the pilot uses a trim switch which viding a degree of thrust vari- You punch in a distance and the rotates the aircraft when pushed ability and directionality so that aircraft will auto rotate to its op- in, activating it when the aircraft the pilot can control roll while WLPDOÀ\RXWFRQGLWLRQ,W¶VDOO 1 SDVVHVWKH\HOORZ672URWDWLRQ taxi to the tram line you stay in 2QHRIWKHELJWHVWSRLQWVIRU line positioned 225 feet from the PRGHRQHWKHFRQYHQWLRQDOÀLJKW DT I was to ensure adequate noz- bow of the ship. mode. You convert the aircraft ]OHFOHDUDQFHLQDOOWKHGLϑHUHQW “That was a temporary mark- LQWRPRGHIRXUWKH6729/ÀLJKW test conditions. The engine noz- LQJDSSOLHGRQWKHÀLJKWGHFNIRU mode, and it takes about 15 sec- zle swings down and back up dur- this trial and is now being perma- onds or so for the doors to open LQJWKHWDNHRϑLQDFFRUGDQFH nently installed on the ship with up and the lift fan to engage. with inputs from the aircraft con- lighting,” explained Rusnok. “It’s “Then you push the throt- trol laws. based on optimising the perfor- tle about halfway up the throt- “It’s all automated,” said Rus- PDQFHRIWKHDLUFUDIWDQGLWVÀ\- tle slide into a detent position at nok. “The pilot is not in the loop ing qualities, so we can get the about 34% engine thrust request. ZKDWVRHYHU±HLWKHUWKH\¶UHSXVK- DHURSODQHRϑZLWKWKHPD[LPXP It sits there and you check the ing the button and letting the amount of nozzle clearance and engine gauges: if the readings aeroplane do its own thing or SHUIRUPDQFH7KH672OLQHLVRXU are okay you slam the throttle pulling back on the stick to help visual cue to either pull the stick to either Mil or Max position and it. Monitoring systems cue when aft or hit the button; or if you’re then release the brakes simulta- something is wrong, so you have RQDXWRPDWHG672\RXVKRXOG neously. Pushing through to max to rely on them to keep you VWDUWVHHLQJWKHDHURSODQH¶VÀLJKW is like an afterburner detent. But VDIHEHFDXVHWKHÀLJKWFRQWUROV controls moving by the line, oth- LW¶VQRWDQDIWHUEXUQHU±\RXFDQ¶W are being moved unbelievably erwise the pilot can intervene go to afterburner in mode four. quickly.” and pull back on the stick. We’ve “It’s a very fast acceleration. 0DM5XVQRNVDLGWKHWDNHRϑ never had to intervene.” The closest we would spot from was very much like that ashore, The pilot also has command the bow is 400 feet, so about ZLWKYHU\OLWWOHVLQNRϑWKHHQGRI of the throttle. Two power setting 175 feet before we would actu- the deck. “The aeroplane is ridic- options are available for take- ally start rotating the aeroplane XORXVO\SRZHUIXOLQ6729/PRGH Rϑ 0LO672DQG0D[672DV0DM >DWWKH672URWDWLRQOLQH@ VRYHU\Just raw, unadulterated power.” Rusnok explained: “When you very quick.” $,5,QWHUQDWLRQDO)6SHFLDO(GLWLRQ-XO\ 2 Forum: F-35 Lightning II AV-8B/ Expeditionary (F-35B) Basing on AM-2 Matting Exercise http://www.f-16.net/ index.php? name=PNphpBB2&file =viewtopic&t=16017& postdays=0&postorde r=asc&highlight=paxri ver&start=30 http://www.f-16.net/ attachments/ swppaxrivervlpadsski jumphoverpit_200.gif PAX RIVER Centre- field ‘Ski Jump’ SPOT Graphic by EAF enables JSF landing anywhere, everywhere 29 Jun 2009 Press Release Number: E200906291 http://www.navair.navy.mil/press_releases/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.view&Press_release_id=4144&site_id=15 - “PATUXENT NAVAL AIR STATION, Md. -- Marine Wing Support Squadron 274 gave engineers help in April to lay the first expeditionary landing site for the F-35B Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter for short takeoff/vertical landing (STOVL) capab- ilities testing. Expeditionary Airfields are mobile systems that allow Marines to quickly build functioning airfields in areas without airfield support. EAFs are built using AM-2 matting: aluminum panels which are assembled in a brickwork pattern to form runways, taxiways, parking sites and other areas required for aircraft operations and maintenance. These EAFs allow the JSF to perform missions in any terrain that does not support a standard-use airfield in mission-critical areas. “This joint testing is a significant step for the Aircraft Launch and Recovery Equipment program,” said ALRE Prog- ram Manager Capt. Randy Mahr. “The JSF and EAF have an integral relationship in expanding our capabilities and suc- cess on the battlefield. The EAF’s AM-2 matting is battle tested, dependable and versatile. It’s exactly what we need for our expeditionary landing and take-off platforms.” Although the AM-2 matting is serving its purpose as vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) pads and a 1,900 x 96-foot runway for the EAF/STOVL testing, it also doubles as the run-up for a test “ski-jump” used in conjunction with JSF testing for the British Royal Navy. The AM-2 matting and the 12-degree ski-jump ramp were installed at the centerfield area last month. “NAVAIR is excited about our involvement in the JSF program, said Mike Jiavaras, ALRE’s EAF team leader. “Knowing that the first time this aircraft demonstrates its impressive VTOL capabilities will be on an expeditionary airfield raises the level of pride the team has in our program and in support of the warfighter.” The ski-jump ramp is used by British Her Majesty’s Ship (HMS) Invincible-class carriers for launch of STOVL aircraft, such as the Harrier GR7A, & is located on the forward-end of the flight deck. JSF program experts ex- plain that the ski-jump is a more fuel efficient way for aircraft take-off. However, the drawback is that it does not allow larger aircraft such as the E-2D Advanced Hawkeye, F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and the EA-18G Growler — future carrier deck-mates with the JSF, the needed distance for launch and recovery. The mock ski-jump is 150- feet long, with a 15-foot high “lip” for aircraft launch. These shore-based ski-jump takeoffs will be conducted at varying airspeeds prior to the first UK ship detachment with the F-35B. “We are extremely excited about getting the first of eight F-35’s to Patuxent River beginning this summer. The first aircraft to arrive, a STOVL aircraft designated BF-1, will use test facilities we have built to test and verify the unique warfighting capabilities the STOVL variant brings. We look forward to supporting the long-standing traditions of expeditionary warfare capabilities for the next 50 years of Marine Corps aviation,” said Capt. Wade Knudson, acting deputy program executive officer and program manager for F-35 Lightning II development.” 1 1 0 2 Y A M 5 0 o t 1 1 0 2 R P A 7 0 , 3 - E N eteil k up/V Area VL / Jump Ski Centrefield 2011 Apr-May Updated r Rive Patuxent NAS NORTH http://naco.faa.gov/d-tpp/1104/00314AD.PDF NE-3, 07 APR 2011 to 05 MAY 2011 Aeronautics in the Asia-Pacific Region 13 Feb 2014 Ski Jump NAS Patuxent River (looking South) S http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GQgekw47CPg Jumping Jack Flash %XWWKDW¶VDOOSDUWRIRSWLPLVLQJ 672\RXVKRXOGVWDUWVHHLQJWKH DOEDHURSODQHWRJHWRϑ DHURSODQH¶VÀLJKWFRQWUROVPRYLQJ July 2014 unknown author WKHVKLSFRPSDUHGWRWKH+DUULHU E\WKHOLQHRWKHUZLVHWKHSLORW AIR International F-35 Special Ed. ZKLFKLVRQO\WROE´ FDQLQWHUYHQHDQGSXOOEDFNRQ “...There are three ways to :LWKVWLFN672WKHSLORW WKHVWLFN:H¶YHQHYHUKDGWR FRQGXFWDVKRUWWDNHRϑ 672 FRQWUROVWKHWDNHRϑE\SXOOLQJ LQWHUYHQH´ LQWKH)% VWLFN672EXWWRQ EDFNRQWKHVWLFNKROGLQJLW 7KHSLORWDOVRKDVFRPPDQGRI 672±DQGDXWR672³7KDW¶VD WKHUHDQGWKHQURWDWLQJWRWKH WKHWKURWWOH7ZRSRZHUVHWWLQJ completely automated way to RSWLPDOSLWFKDQJOHWRÀ\Rϑ,Q RSWLRQVDUHDYDLODEOHIRUWDNH 672WKHDLUFUDIWRϑWKHÀLJKW EXWWRQ672WKHSLORWXVHVDWULP Rϑ 0LO672DQG0D[672DV0DM deck. You punch in a distance VZLWFKZKLFKURWDWHVWKHDLUFUDIW 5XVQRNH[SODLQHG ³:KHQ\RX DQGWKHDLUFUDIWZLOODXWRURWDWH ZKHQSXVKHGLQDFWLYDWLQJ WD[LWRWKHWUDPOLQH\RXVWD\LQ WRLWVRSWLPDOÀ\RXWFRQGLWLRQ LWZKHQWKHDLUFUDIWSDVVHV PRGHRQHWKHFRQYHQWLRQDOÀLJKW ,W¶VDOOEDVHGRQGLVWDQFH ZH WKH\HOORZ672URWDWLRQOLQH PRGH “[08 Mar 2010] ...From an operational point of view, ‘‘We have identified mission customers’ support requirements for new and legacy programs,” [PaxRiver CO] Macyko said. ‘‘We have finished a $15 million airfield renovation project, and built mission-unique facilities such as the ski jump ramp, hover pads and the expeditionary airfield LHA for the F-35B Lightning II aircraft....” http://www.paxpartnership.org/index.cfm?action=NWD&NW_ID=22 N NAS Patuxent River Centrefield Ski Jump & VL Pad SKI JUMP LEFT LHA deck marked on tarmac runway Two LHA decks of 600 feet marked out with ski jump further down the graphic both with AM-2 matting laid midfield NAS Patuxent River image dated 20 Oct 2013 %ULWLVKSLORWLVILUVWWRWHVW)%VNLMXPSODXQFK F-35 Lightning II %$(6\VWHPVSOF0DQXIDFWXULQJ*URXS_-XQH http://www.onlineamd.com/ british-pilot-tests-f35b-jump-062415.aspx Pax River Integrated Test Force :DVKLQJWRQ±7KHODXQFKWRRNSODFHDW1DYDO$LU6WDWLRQ3DWX[HQW5LYHU0DU\ODQGRQ-XQH IURP 3XEOLF$IIDLUV5HOHDVH– DODQGEDVHGVNLMXPSDQGPDUNVWKHVWDUWRIDQLQLWLDOWHVWLQJSKDVHH[SHFWHGWRODVWWZRZHHNV7KHWULDOV GHPRQVWUDWHWKHDLUFUDIW¶VDELOLW\WRWDNHRIIVDIHO\DQGHIIHFWLYHO\IURPDVNLMXPSUDPSVLPLODUWRWKDWZKLFK http://www.jsf.mil/news/docs/20150619_SkiJump.pdf ZLOOEHXVHGRQWKH8.¶VQHZDLUFUDIWFDUULHU6NLMXPSUDPSVSURYLGHWKHDLUFUDIWZLWKDQXSZDUGIOLJKWSDWK PHDQLQJWKHDLUFUDIWFDQWDNHRIIIURPWKHDYDLODEOHGLVWDQFHZLWKDJUHDWHUSD\ORDGZKLFKPHDQVPRUH F-35B COMPLETES FIRST SKI JUMP LAUNCH ZHDSRQV $Q)%/LJKWQLQJ,,FRPSOHWHGWKHILUVWUDPSDVVLVWHGVKRUWWDNHRIIWR %$(6\VWHPVWHVWSLORW3HWH:LOVRQVDLG ³,W¶VDOZD\VH[FLWLQJZKHQ\RXJHWWRGRVRPHWKLQJLQDYLDWLRQIRU WHVWWKHDLUFUDIW VFRPSDWLELOLW\ZLWK%ULWLVKDQG,WDOLDQDLUFUDIW WKHILUVWWLPH:HVSHQGOLWHUDOO\\HDUVSODQQLQJWKHVHµILUVWV¶ZLWKKXQGUHGVRIKRXUVLQWKHVLPXODWRUDVWKH FDUULHUV HYHQWJHWVFORVHEXWHYHQZLWKDOOWKHSUHSDUDWLRQWKHWHVWWHDPUHPDLQVIRFXVHGRQWKHSRWHQWLDOWKDW 7KLVWHVWZDVDVXFFHVVIRUWKHMRLQWVNLMXPSWHDPVDLG3HWHU:LOVRQ VRPHWKLQJXQH[SHFWHGPLJKWKDSSHQ$VLVXVXDOO\WKHFDVHWKHMHWSHUIRUPHGDVH[SHFWHGDQGLWZDVD UHDOSOHDVXUH´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³VNLMXPS´KDVEHHQDGRSWHGRYHUWKH\HDUVEHFDXVHLWLQYRNHVDIHHOLQJRIOHDSLQJLQWR XVLQJWKHVHUHVXOWVDORQJZLWKWKRVHIURPIXWXUHWHVWLQJWRKHOSXV WKHDLU SUHSDUHIRUWKHILUVWVKLSERDUGVNLMXPSODXQFKIURP+064XHHQ(OL]DEHWK “The F-35 Lightning II SLOW MOTION 1st F-35B A Message from Lorraine Martin 22 Oct 2015 LM Pax River Integrated Test Ski Jump Launch 19 June 2015 "...Ski Jump testing at Pax River is ongoing, and the team Force from Air Test and https://www.youtube.com is really doing some amazing work. They completed nine Evaluation Squadron /watch?v=ihpNrDriZrc successful takeoffs from the ski jump platform. Through- (VX) 23 conducted the out the testing they found some challenges to overcome first-ever ski jump of an and work, but the team has done a great job of working F-35B Lightning II short through those challenges. They have to complete eight take-off/vertical-landing more tests to finish up phase one testing. It’s exciting to (STOVL) variant June 19. see images of the F-35B taking off from the ski jump, and I know the U.K. and Italy are also excited about this testing During flight 298, BAE and the capabilities it brings to their countries...." test pilot Peter Wilson https://www.f35.com/assets/ launched aircraft BF-04 uploads/documents/16409/ from a land-based ski f-35_weekly_update jump located aboard _10_22_15.pdf NAS Patuxent River. This test is the first of a series of U.K. ski jump events scheduled for 2015. Lockheed Martin photo by Andy Wolfe.” F-35B First Ski Jump Test NAS Patuxent River, MD June 19, 2015 VIDEO: https://www.youtube. com/watch?v=pIO5K-fUMzQ https://www.f35.com/assets/ uploads/images/15850/ski- jump-news__main.jpg Navy’s new F-35 jump jet flies from trademark ski ramp for 1st time [19] 23 June 2015 https://navynews.co.uk/archive/news/item/12935 “Veteran test pilot Peter ‘Wizzer’ Wilson took off in an F-35B using the jump–identical to those fitted on the Royal Navy’s new carriers [not true]. This is the moment years of complex calculat- ions, computer simulations, planning, training & testing pays off for the Navy’s jet of tomorrow. This is the first launch [19 June 2015] of the F-35B Lightning II using a ski jump ramp – exactly as it will do when launched from flight deck of HMS Queen Elizabeth and Prince of Wales. Naval reservist and BAE Systems test pilot Peter ‘Wizzer’ Wilson guided his state-of-the-art strike fighter BF-04 down the runway at the US Navy’s Pax River air base, about 45 miles from the American capital, where the ramp has been built to pave the way for Royal Navy carrier operations. “It’s always exciting when you get to do something in aviation for the first time,” said Peter. “We spend literally years planning these ‘firsts’, with hundreds of hours in the simulator as the event gets close, but even with all the preparation the test team remains focussed on the potential that something unexpected might happen. As is usually the case, the jet performed as expected and it was a real pleasure. “I can’t wait until we’re conducting F-35 ski jumps from the deck of the Queen Elizabeth-class carrier." Ski jumps were fitted to the RN’s generation of Harrier carriers to give the jets more lift with less speed than a conventional flat flight deck. The concept has been retained with the Queen Elizabeth class – although the ‘replica’ ramp has been built in Maryland, not Yeovilton. On the new carriers the structure rises about six metres (20ft) above the normal deck. Two weeks of initial trials are being carried out with the data gathered fed back by the test team to engineers and designers, including those at Warton in Lancashire where F-35 simulators help pilots ‘fly’ from the deck of HMS Queen Elizabeth – before they do it for real from 2018 onwards.” Salty Dogs & Funky Jets F-35B BF-04. Sqn Ldr Edgell told (OL]DEHWKFODVVFDUULHUV Sqn AIR International: “Phase 1 is a Ldr Edgell explained: “The Pax October 2015 Mark Ayton risk-reduction phase designed to River ramp design process dates …Ski Jump Trials KLJKOLJKWDQ\VLJQL¿FDQWKDUGZDUH back to 2005 but, at the time, the Her Majesty’s Ship Queen or software updates that may be 4XHHQ(OL]DEHWKUDPSSUR¿OHZDV (OL]DEHWK 5 LV¿WWHGZLWKD required prior to commencing the not known. Analysis conducted in VNLMXPSOLNHQRRWKHU DQHZ bulk of testing. It comprises 29 2005 showed we simply needed GHVLJQWDLORUHGWREHXVHGE\ ski-jump launches. WRXVHDUDPSZLWKDSUR¿OHWKDW YHU\H[SHQVLYHQHZDLUFUDIW “Phase 1 will ensure our models allows us to stay just under the /DXQFKLQJDOE)%RϑD and predictions are correct. If predicted F-35B ultimate loads and ski jump requires some serious anything needs addressing we can the Invincible-class ramp achieved PDWKVHQJLQHHULQJDQGWHVWLQJ do so in a timely fashion and then this.” The F-35B ski jump test go into the 140-sortie Phase 2.” 3D[5LYHU¶VUDPSDOORZVWKH campaign should have started The ski jump used on HMS WHVWWHDPWRPDNHDGMXVWPHQWV in March of this year, but was Queen Elizabeth has a curved IRUGLϑHUHQWSUR¿OHVDQG delayed due to brutal sub-zero leading edge designed to HQFRPSDVVHYHU\WKLQJEHORZ temperatures and snow that simultaneously launch an F-35B WKHXOWLPDWHORDGVRIWKH blighted Patuxent River at the upward and forward with a greater DLUFUDIW³7KRXJKWKHYHUL¿FDWLRQ time. Aircraft BF-01 was originally WDNHRϑZHLJKWDQGOHVVHQGVSHHG of our models during phases 1 and assigned to conduct the ski jump than required for an unassisted 2 we can tweak the control laws events but was unable to remain at horizontal launch aboard an LHD- WRZRUNRϑRWKHUW\SHVRIUDPS Pax while the weather improved. It class amphibious assault ship, such none of which are the same,” said was already scheduled to deploy to as USS Wasp (LHD 1). Sqn Ldr Edgell. When the aircraft Edwards Air Force Base, California 7KHUHDGHUPD\EHVXUSULVHG FRPHVRϑWKHHQGLWLVEDOOLVWLF to conduct wet runway and to learn that the ski ramp built DQGDFFHOHUDWHVWRWKHÀ\DZD\DLU crosswind testing. DW3D[5LYHULVEDVHGRQWKH speed, typically 10-20kts higher The test programme comprises W\SHXVHGRQWKH,QYLQFLEOH than launch speed, and therefore WZRSKDVHVWKH¿UVWRIZKLFK FODVVDLUFUDIWFDUULHUVZKLFK reduces ground roll. eventually began on June 19 LVDOLWWOHELWVKRUWHU IW ³7KHUH¶VD¿QHOLQHEHWZHHQ when BAE Systems test pilot Peter DQGVOLJKWO\VKDOORZHU ensuring we have suitable :LOVRQFRQGXFWHGWKH¿UVWWDNH than the ramp on Queen JHDUORDGVDQGÀ\DZD\VSHHG´ RϑXVLQJWKHVNLMXPSDW3D[ZLWK 1 explained Sqn Ldr Edgell. system moves the horizontal tails malfunction, the pilot takes control “We want lots of margin on and the nozzles into the optimum DQGPDQXDOO\ÀLHVRϑWKHHGJHRI both of those. To achieve margin position. It needs to hit 45 knots the ramp, which is why he must for gear loads we need to be slow, going up the ramp. guard the stick during the roll. i.e. start right at the bottom of “The throttle needs to be 7KHUHLVQRVLJQL¿FDQWSDUWIRU the ramp. To achieve margin on above 65% ETR, with 6 degrees WKHSLORWWRSOD\LQWKHWDNHRϑ± PLQLPXPÀ\DZD\VSHHGZHQHHG of attitude and a pitch rate of 6 the result of a design philosophy to start towards the back of the degrees per second. At that point it to minimise the pilot’s workload. run-up. We blend the two aspects PRYHVDOORIWKHHϑHFWRUVLQWRWKH $JRRGH[DPSOHLVWUDFNLQJ together and meet in the middle right place. Bear in mind the ski the centreline on a rolling to gain the safest launch spot. For jump at Pax is only 150 feet long, SLWFKLQJGHFNDWQLJKW7KDW¶V WKHYHU\¿UVWVRUWLHRXUVSRWWLQJ so the aircraft hits all of those a challenge in a Harrier but in distance will be conservative and parameters with less than 100 feet the F-35B it’s his only task so ZLOOODXQFKWKHMHWRϑWKHHQGRI remaining. By the time it goes KHVKRXOGGRDPXFKEHWWHU the ramp straight into a previously RϑWKHHGJHRIWKHUDPSDOO MRE The administrative burden ÀRZQÀLJKWFRQGLWLRQ´ WKHVXUIDFHVDQGWKHQR]]OHV RQWKHSLORWKDVEHHQVLJQL¿FDQWO\ Such regimes have been are at the optimum position, reduced: in this situation to an ÀRZQVHYHUDOWLPHVGXULQJVKRUW WKHDLUFUDIWURWDWHVXSWRWKH HϑRUWOHVVOHYHO WDNHRϑVDWWKH¿HOGDQG6729/ RSWLPXPSLWFKDWWLWXGHWRÀ\ Phase 2 will introduce cross- departures. DZD\,W¶VSUHWW\FOHYHUVWXϑ´ winds, external stores, asymmetry, Sqn Ldr Edgell explained an Sqn Ldr Edgell described the minimum performance (minimum interesting fact about the take- ODXQFKSURFHVV ³ ‘John Farley’ and have a lower workload than doing shows how straightforward the ‘Engines’ on Ski Jumps nothing?”…. evolution is. http://www.pprune.org/military-aviation/424953-f- +RZHYHULW¶VDORWPRUH & 35-cancelled-then-what-317.html#post9021527 WKDQµVWUDLJKWIRUZDUG¶,W¶VDOLWWOH ‘John Farley’ 23 Jun 2015: ,QFLGHQWDOO\LI\RXORRNDWDQ\ VXUSULVLQJJLYHQWKDWWKLVLVD http://www.pprune.org/military-aviation/424953-f- YLGHRRID%ÀDWGHFNWDNHRII SLORWV¶IRUXPKRZIHZSHRSOH 35-cancelled-then-what-317.html#post9021527 and watch the tailplane activity PHQWLRQWKHVLJQL¿FDQWDGYDQWDJHV “Re ski-jumps, it does not take crossing the end and compare LWGHOLYHUV)LUVWO\RSHUDWLRQDO much thought to realise that the that with the tailplane activity off the ski jump will allow the F-35B ramp delivers any aircraft into the ski-jump you will notice that to launch on task with at least free air in a nose up attitude and HYHQPRGHUQÀLJKWFRQWUROV\VWHPV another ton and a half of fuel climbing. This saves the pilot ¿QGOLIHHDVLHUIURPDUDPS´ DQGRUZHDSRQV7KDW¶VDWRQ RU having to arrange all of this when & two) of pure military goodness. GHSDUWLQJIURPWKHÀDW,QGHHG 6HFRQGO\VDIHW\$V-)SRLQWVRXW EDFNLQ ZKHQWKHERI¿QV ‘ENGINES’ 23 Jun 2015: the aircraft leaves the jump nose WKRXJKW,ZDVH[DJJHUDWLQJKRZ http://www.pprune.org/military-aviation/424953-f- 35-cancelled-then-what-317.html#post9021824 up and climbing without the pilot easy a jump was compared to a KDYLQJWRGRDQ\WKLQJ,IDQ\WKLQJ ÀDWWDNHRII,JDYHWKHPWKHQH[W ³3HUKDSV,FDQKHOSRXWDELWKHUH GRHVJRZURQJWKHSLORWKDVPDQ\ record with a straight line on the :KDW,FDQ¶WGRLVLPSURYHRQJF’s more precious seconds to dump tailplane and aileron traces for 35 VXFFLQFWDQGµVSRWRQ¶FRPPHQWV VWRUHVMXPSRXW$WQLJKWRULQEDG secs after crossing the end. At about ski jump takeoffs. They ZHDWKHURUIURPDSLWFKLQJGHFN the debrief they showed me the DUHE\VRPHGLVWDQFHWKHORZHVW WKDW¶VDOVRDORWRIJRRGQHVV traces and apologised for the workload way of getting a combat ,GRXQGHUVWDQGZK\VRPH instrumentation drop out on the MHWLQWRWKHDLU7KHÀDW672 posters think this looks like a WDLOSODQHDQGDLOHURQFKDQQHOV, presented many more challenges µSXFNHU¶KHDY\HYROXWLRQEXWLW¶V VDLG³,WZDVQRWDGURSRXW,ZDV WRWKH)%WHDPDQGWKHODFN UHDOO\KRQHVWO\QRW(YHU\+DUULHU not touching the stick - can you of aft control surface movement SLORW,ZRUNHGZLWKVDLGWKDWLWZDV 1 DFRPSOHWHQRQHYHQW:KDW¶V F-35B does this for him/her. ZDVDPLQLPXP52&RIIHHW really amazing is that these gains For those that might not be SHUPLQXWHDWWKHµLQÀH[LRQSRLQW¶ come without penalty to the familiar with the way a ski jump 2WKHUQDWLRQVKDYHGLIIHUHQWOLPLWV DLUFUDIWZKLFKLVIDLUO\UDUH7KH 672ZRUNVWKHNH\WKLQJWRµJHW¶ A powered lift aircraft can Harrier needed no mods to do is that the aircraft leaves the µVFKHGXOH¶ DGMXVW ZLQJDQGMHWOLIW VNLMXPSVVDYHH[WUDVHUYLFLQJ UDPS%(/2:À\LQJVSHHG6R VRDVWRPD[LPLVHWKHSD\ORDG checks on the nose leg. The the rate of climb starts to decay that can be delivered from the )%KDVQHHGHGQRQH7KHÀDW DIWHUUDPSH[LWGHSHQGLQJRQKRZ UDPS,WFDQDOVREHFRQWUROOHGZHOO GHFN672GURYHWKHGHVLJQWKH much wing lift and jet lift is being EHORZZLQJERUQHÀ\LQJVSHHGV ski jump came basically free. SURYLGHG+RZHYHUWKHDLUFUDIW 8QIRUWXQDWHO\FRQYHQWLRQDODLUFUDIW 2KDQGGRQ¶WIRUJHWWKDWLW¶V LVVWLOOFOLPELQJ$VLWDFFHOHUDWHV FDQ¶WGRHLWKHURIWKHVH7KH\KDYH another brilliantly simple and wing lift increases and jet lift can to launch at a speed at which they effective naval aviation idea from be reduced by altering the angle FDQÀ\FRQWUROODEO\RQZLQJOLIW WKH8.¶V)OHHW$LU$UP5HVSHFW RIWKHSURSXOVLRQV\VWHP¶VQR]]OHV DORQH7KHLURQO\RSWLRQ ZLWKDOO $WVRPHSRLQWDIWHUUDPSH[LW thrust already applied) to arrest JTO: With the partnership between the Lockheed Martin and the UK's BAE Systems, the design of the F-35B has incorporated the ski jump takeoff capability from the very beginning. HMS Queen Elizabeth is the first of two Queen Elizabeth Class aircraft carriers equipped with a ski-jump ramp, charged with maintaining security for the UK and overseas, increasing the UK’s ability to project maritime and air power and responding to crises worldwide. HMS Queen Elizabeth is an impressive 280 meters, or nearly 1,000 feet, in length, and displaces up to 65,000 tons of water. It is so big that each of its two propellers weigh 33 tons. With the ability to move 500 miles a day, it can react quickly to situations across the globe. The UK will declare F-35 maritime Initial Operational Capability in 2020. When the new carrier comes into “As the jet travels up the ski jump it automatically makes the necessary adjustments to the nozzle and control service, the F-35B will dominate the skies for decades to come. Squadron Leader Andy “GARY” Edgell, RAF, is surface deflections. With the F-35 automatically adjusting for the optimum takeoff, the pilot is free to adopt more the first UK military pilot to complete a takeoff from the ski jump with an F-35B. of a supervisory role, monitoring for any off-nominal behavior and ready to immediately take full control, if necessary,” said Edgell. “Virtue of the superb F-35 STOVL handling qualities, the low pilot workload during “The performance of the jet has been great. As the pilot, I have to do very little to accomplish a perfect ski jump launch and recovery from an aircraft carrier enables the pilot to focus more on the operational task at hand and takeoff,” commented Edgell. “I push the STOVL [short take off vertical landing] button to convert to Mode 4, less on the administrative aspects of the flight.” push throttle to mil and use the pedals for minor directional inputs to remain on centerline.” The F-35B represents the first STOVL aircraft with the ability to go supersonic, and it will change the way the The F-35B automatically positions the control surfaces and nozzles for takeoff, a unique capability compared UK defends their country for many decades. The next phase of this testing will continue to expand the takeoff with previous STOVL aircraft. Such automation frees up pilot capacity and provides an added safety envelope and eventually add stores both internally and externally. Adding more stores highlights the advantage enhancement. The aircraft treats the take off just like a regular short take off until it recognizes the six-degree of using the ski jump as the weight increases to an eventual fully loaded F-35B. The testing at NAS Patuxent per-second pitch rate and six-degree pitch angle about half way up the ramp. The horizontal tails and nozzle River is proving the F-35B can operate from a ski-jump carrier and be a powerful force for the UK when they then automatically maneuver downward, and the vane box does not budge. The vane box sits directly under the begin deployments in the 2020s. lift fan and directs the airflow to allow for the proper lift off the surface. )DUQERURXJK )%FRPSOHWHV LQLWLDOSKDVHRIODQGEDVHGVNLMXPS WULDOV 3HWHU)HOVWHDG)DUQERURXJK ,+6-DQH V'HIHQFH:HHNO\-XO\ http://www.janes.com/article/62226/farnborough-2016-f-35b- completes-initial-phase-of-land-based-ski-jump-trials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ome Blog About Us Partnering With Us Facilities/Capabilities Employment Contact Us Links Home Facilities/Capabilities Aircraft Launch and Recovery / Support Equipment Centerfield Short Take Off/Vertical Landing ((STOVL)STOVL) Centerfield Short Take Off/Vertical Landing (STOVL) The Centerfield STOVL (Short Takeoff/Vertical Landing) was completed in 2009, to support the developmental testing of the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) F-35B STOVL aircraft. Located in the centerfield area at NAS Patuxent River, the STOVL Centerfield Facility consists of an AM-2 Expeditionary Airfield (EAF), an AM-2 Vertical Takeoff and Landing (VTOL) pad within a painted LHD deck outline, a Ski Jump, and a grated Hover Pit. The EAF and VTOL Pad AM-2 surfaces are representative of current US Marine Corps austere/forward deployed basing capabilities. These surfaces will be used to test F-35B compatibility during Short Takeoff (STO), Vertical Landing (VL), and Slow Landing (SL). 50 ft less long & 5 ft less tall but similar to the CVF ski jump profile The Ski Jump, built to match the profile of the UK HMS Invincible Class Ships, will provide a land-based test site for unique ship compatibility. The Hover Pit was constructed during the X-32/X-35 concept demonstration phase of the JSF Program and has supported operations with British Sea Harrier aircraft. The Hover Pit also provides a means to perform STOVL mode engine runs without ground effects by ducting exhaust thrust away from the aircraft through a series of vanes below the top grating of the pit. http://www.navair.navy.mil/nawcad/ index.cfm?fuseaction=home.content_detail Centerfield STOVL &key=99E8E3FA-3C12-4BCC-A905-6838819A5C10 Home About Us Partnering With Us Facilities/Capabilities Employment Contact Us Links This is an official U.S. Navy Web site. This site is a U.S. Department of Defense System. Please read our Privacy Policy and our Web Site Accessibility Notice. Title: The STOVL Joint Strike 7KH0DULQH&RUSVGRHVQRWKDYHHQRXJK ZLOOUHSODFHLWLVWKHRQO\MHWWKDWGHSOR\V WKH\KDYH860&SDLQWHGRQWKHP Expeditionary Airfields are mobile systems that allow Marines to quickly build functioning airfields in areas without airfield support. EAFs are built using AM-2 matting: aluminum panels which are assembled in a brickwork pattern to form runways, taxiways, parking sites and other areas required for aircraft operations and maintenance. These EAFs allow the JSF to perform missions in any terrain that does not support a standard-use airfield in mission - critical areas. “This joint testing is a significant step for the Aircraft Launch and Recovery Equipment program,” said ALRE Program Manager Capt. Randy Mahr. “The JSF and EAF have an integral relationship in expanding our capabilities and success on the battlefield. The EAF’s AM-2 matting is battle tested, dependable and versatile. It’s exactly what we need for our expeditionary landing and take-off platforms.” Although the AM-2 matting is serving its purpose as vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) pads and a 1,900 x 96-foot runway for the EAF/STOVL testing, it also doubles as the run-up for a test “ski-jump” used in conjunction with JSF testing for the British Royal Navy. The AM-2 matting and the 12-degree ski-jump ramp were installed at the centerfield area last month. May 2009 “NAVAIR is excited about our involvement in the JSF program, said Mike Jiavaras, ALRE’s EAF team leader. “Knowing that the first time this aircraft demonstrates its impressive VTOL capabilities will be on an expeditionary airfield raises the level of pride the team has in our program and in support of the warfighter.” The ski-jump ramp is used by British Her Majesty’s Ship (HMS) Invincible-class carriers for launch of STOVL aircraft, such as the Harrier GR7A, and is located on the forward-end of the flight deck. JSF program experts explain that the ski-jump is a more fuel efficient way for aircraft take-off. However, the drawback is that it does not allow larger aircraft such as the E- 2D Advanced Hawkeye, F/A -18E/F Super Hornet and the EA -18G Growler - future carrier deck-mates with the JSF, the needed distance for launch and recovery. The mock ski-jump is 150 -feet long, with a 15-foot high “lip” for aircraft launch. These shore-based ski-jump takeoffs will be conducted at varying airspeeds prior to the first UK ship detachment with the F-35B. “We are extremely excited about getting the first of eight F-35’s to Patuxent River beginning this summer. The first aircraft to arrive, a STOVL aircraft designated BF-1, will use test facilities we have built to test and verify the unique warfighting capabilities the STOVL variant brings. We look forward to supporting the long-standing traditions of expeditionary warfare capabilities for the next 50 years of Marine Corps aviation,” said Capt. Wade Knudson, acting deputy program executive officer and program manager for F-35 Lightning II development. The STOVL Variant of Joint Strike Fighter: Are its’ Tactical Compromises Warranted? Captain G.M. Beisbier, 01 Mar 2002 http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA496827&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf “...STOVL JSF DESIGN REQUIREMENTS [pages 5-6] The design requirements for the STOVL JSF mandated a Vertical Lift Bring Back (VLBB) capab- ility of 5000lbs of fuel and ordnance on a tropical day. The STOVL JSF’s empty gross weight is 29,735 lbs, and it is equipped with a lift fan design capable of producing 39,800 lbs of vertical lift at sea level on a tropical day. An ability to produce 39,800lbs of thrust minus 29,735 lbs gross weight and 3000 lbs of thrust to safely maneuver the aircraft equals 7,065 lbs of VLBB. As a re- sult the STOVL JSF thirty percent more VLBB then the requirements document mandated (Killea). This means in a worst case, sea-based scenario the STOVL JSF is more than capable of conducting a vertical landing with 4000 lbs, vise 2000 lbs, ordnance, plus two 325-lb radar mis- siles, and 2200 lbs of fuel for an approach, vertical landing, and reserve (Killea)....” - Pentagon Slackens Difficult-To-Achieve JSF Performance Requirements J. Sherman Mar 1, 2012 http://insidedefense.com/201203012392003/Inside-Defense-General/Public-Articles/pentagon-waters-down-difficult-to-achieve-jsf-performance-requirements/menu-id-926.html - “...The short-take-off-and-landing KPP before the JROC review last month was 550 feet. In April 2011, the Pentagon estimated that the STOVL variant could execute a short take-off in 544 feet while carrying two Joint Direct Attack Munitions and two AIM-120 missiles in- ternally, as well as enough fuel to fly 450 nautical miles. By last month, that take-off dist- ance estimate grew to 568 feet, according to DOD sources. The JROC, accordingly, agreed to extend the required take-off distance to 600 feet, according to DOD officials....” & Tweaks Allow Navy To Meet JSF Aircraft-Carrier Landing Speed Target | DefenseAlert, 09 Mar 2012 http://insidedefense.com/index.php?option=com_user&view=login&return=aHR0cDovL2luc2lkZWRlZmVuc2UuY29tLzIwMTIwMzA5MjM5Mjc0NC9JbnNpZGUtRGVmZW5zZS1EYWlseS1OZXdzL0RlZmVuc2VBbGVydC90d2Vha3MtYWxsb3ctbmF2eS10by1tZWV0LWpzZi1haXJjcmFmdC1jYXJyaWVyLWxhbmRpbmctc3BlZWQtdGFyZ2V0L21lbnUtaWQtNjEuaHRtbA== - “With the Joint Strike Fighter aircraft-carrier variant expected to miss a key performance parameter related to its maximum allowable landing speed, the Pentagon recently adjusted F-35C fuel storage calculations to ensure the aircraft met a critical operational requirement, according to Defense Department officials.” Appropriators Question F-35B’s Weight Emelie Rutherford, March 2, 2012 http://www.defensedaily.com/sectors/navy_usmc/Appropriators-Question-F-35Bs-Weight_16933.html - Excerpts from: http://www.arrse.co.uk/current-affairs-news-analysis/178170-uk-aircraft-carrier-plans-confusion-ministers-revisit-square-one-5.html - “A Marine Corps official told concerned lawmakers yesterday the weight of the devel- opmental Joint Strike Fighter F-35B jet fighter has dropped since tests showed it near its maximum poundage in recent months...... House Appropriations Defense sub- committee (HAC-D) member Jim Moran (D-Va.) cited data from November showing the F-35B was only 230 pounds shy of its maximum intended weight of 32,557 pounds, saying: "We want to raise that as a warning flag."...... Assistant Marine Corps Commandant Gen. Joseph Dunford told Moran F-35B workers have worked to keep the aircraft's weight in check since the November ass- essment was conducted. "You identified a point in time when there was an issue," the No. 2 Marine Corps official said. "We are actually better off than we were back in November." Pressed by HAC-D Ranking Member Norm Dicks (D-Wash.) on what improvements have been made, Dunford said the F-35B engineering team has worked on an "engin- eering solution." "And weight is an independent variable in every single one of the engineering solutions that's been identified," he said. "Solutions that have been id- entified for those engineering challenges have been such that they have not penalized the aircraft with regard to weight," he added. "I think the trends are absolutely in the right direction, and everyone that's involved with the program is sensitized to the issue of weight and how important that is.”....” Commonality F-35 …As an example of the high de- «6\VWHP'HYHORSPHQWDQG A/B/C gree of commonality within the 'HPRQVWUDWLRQ 6'' VWDUWHGLP- in Complex Lockheed Martin concept, the en- mediately upon the Lockheed Mar- Product Families: tire wing box and fuselage were tin contract award in October of common between the CTOL and 2001… Implications of 6729/FRQ¿JXUDWLRQV'LϑHU- «7KHJRDOVRIWKH6''SKDVH Divergence and ent leading edges, trailing edges, were very similar to the original and tips were utilized to create all -$67JRDOV FUHDWHDQDϑRUGDEOH /LIHF\FOH2ϑVHWV three wings…. program through the development …Lockheed Martin was aiming of a highly common tri-variant air- Ryan C. Boas Sept 2008; pp 81-4 for 80% commonality (Wolf, 1998). craft family and common manu- “…Lockheed Martin’s approach uti- The levels of commonality were facturing line. The expected bene- lized the F-22 as a conceptual dropping as both teams learned ¿WVRIFRPPRQDOLW\ZHUHDGUDVWLF baseline along with a shaft- driv- more about the needs of the indi- reduction in development, man- en STOVL concept that had several vidual services and the capabilities ufacturing, and lifecycle operat- years of prior development. Lock- of their technologies and designs…. ing costs. Based on the knowledge heed Martin built the CTOL vari- Manufacturing concepts were JDLQHGLQ&'3WKHWHDPUHDOL]HG ant (X-35A), demonstrated its per- also investigated as part of the that mission and vehicle systems IRUPDQFHDQGWKHQPRGL¿HGWKH &'3HϑRUWDQGSHUWKH-6)YLVLRQ would have the highest degree of exact same aircraft to demon- of mixed model manufacturing. commonality, while airframe com- strate STOVL performance (X-35B). The three variants would be pro- monality would be lower across Carrier performance (X-35C) was duced on the same line with high- the three variants due to the tight demonstrated using the second ly common tooling. A high degree coupling between airframe de- aircraft. The ability to leverage the of part and manufacturing pro- signs and aircraft performance dif- F-22 (including experience with the cess overlap was planned as is il- IHUHQWLDWLRQ'LϑHUHQFHVLQWKH Pratt & Whitney F119 engine) pre- OXVWUDWHGLQD-RLQW3URJUDP2ϒFH airframes would be required to en- sented a somewhat lower risk ap- FRQFHSWWDNHQIURPD-XQH able STOVL capability (e.g., shaft- proach than that taken by Boeing… presentation…. driven lift fan) and to meet the 1 varying structural needs dictated programs. That said, meeting the addressed by a more experienced by variations in operating condi- requirements of the individual ser- team, with well understood tools WLRQVVXFKDVWDNHRϑODQGLQJDQG vice branches was paramount to DQGSURFHVVHV7KHVHEHQH¿WVRXW- ÀLJKWORDGUHTXLUHPHQWV$VDQH[- WKH-6)SURJUDP¶VVXFFHVV« weighed the fact that STOVL de- ample, a carrier landing requires …The initial development order mand actually preceded demand reduced approach speeds and im- for the three variants was to be for the CTOL aircraft. CV would parts large vertical loads on the CTOL, followed by STOVL, and follow CTOL and STOVL because aircraft as it “drops” onto the air- then CV; a decision driven main- demand for CV production aircraft FUDIWFDUULHU¶VGHFN7KH&'3VLQ- ly by the desire to reduce internal was scheduled the farthest out…. JOHSLORWVLQJOHHQJLQHFRQ¿JXUD- development risk. The CTOL vari- …CTOL layout started imme- tion would be retained, as would ant was selected as the lead vari- GLDWHO\DIWHUWKH0DUFK3'5 WKH&'3GHPRQVWUDWRUV¶EDVLFOLQHV ant because it was “easy” to devel- and marked an important transi- and external features. Mixed-mod- RSLQUHODWLRQWRWKHPRUHGLϒFXOW WLRQIRUWKH-6)SURJUDP WKHSUR- el manufacturing would be utilized STOVL version and because the gram had transitioned from the to leverage common tooling, train- CTOL variant had served as the parallel development of the three ing, and economies of scale. baseline for all prior development variant concepts to sequential lay- Although the variants would HϑRUW &72/DOORZHG6729/OLIW out development, starting with be highly common, the message fan complexity to be avoided for the CTOL variant. While decisions to each of the three services was WKH¿UVWYDULDQWDQGZDVDOVRWKH would be made with consideration that they would get their desired best understood of the three vari- for all three variants, the majori- aircraft, regardless of the under- DQWV7KH-6)WHDPZDVSUHSDULQJ ty of the focus was placed on de- lying platform. Maintaining com- to embark on an extremely com- veloping the CTOL variant. STOVL monality across the variants would plex program and was about to do capabilities (mainly the lift fan provide the desired capabilities so with a newly formed team…. and ducts) would be added to the to each of the services at a much …After development of the CTOL baseline to form the B vari- lower cost than could be expect- CTOL variant, STOVL would rep- ant, while the C variant would ed through the execution of three resent an incremental increase be formed by scaling certain as- LQGHSHQGHQW¿JKWHUGHYHORSPHQW in complexity but would be pects of the CTOL variant….” http://esd.mit.edu/people/dissertations/boas.pdf 2 Commonality in Complex Product Families: Implications of Divergence & Lifecycle Offsets Ryan C. Boas Sept 2008; pp 81-4 http://esd.mit.edu/people/dissertations/boas.pdf - “…The initial development order for the three variants was to be CTOL, followed by STOVL, and then CV; a decision driven mainly by the desire to reduce internal develop- ment risk. The CTOL variant was selected as the lead variant because it was “easy” to develop in relation to the more difficult STOVL version and because the CTOL variant had served as the baseline for all prior development effort: CTOL allowed STOVL lift fan complexity to be avoided for the first variant and was also the best understood of the three variants. The JSF team was preparing to embark on an extremely complex program and was about to do so with a newly formed team…. …After development of the CTOL variant, STOVL would represent an incremental in- crease in complexity but would be addressed by a more experienced team, withwellun- derstood tools and processes. These benefits outweighed the fact that STOVL demand actually preceded demand for the CTOL aircraft. CV would follow CTOL and STOVL be- cause demand for CV production aircraft was scheduled the farthest out…. …CTOL layout started immediately after the March 2003 PDR and marked an import- ant transition for the JSF program: the program had transitioned from the parallel devel- opment of the three variant concepts to sequential layout development, starting with the CTOL variant. While decisions would be made with consideration for all three variants, the majority of the focus was placed on developing the CTOL variant. STOVL capabilities (mainly the lift fan and ducts) would be added to the CTOL baseline to form the B variant, while the C variant would be formed by scaling certain aspects of the CTOL variant….” http://handle.dtic. mil/100.2/ ADA399988 ttp://www.navair.navy.mil/press_releases/index.cfm? fuseaction=home.view&Press_release_id=4144&site_id=15 The Influence of Ship Configuration on the Design of the Joint Strike Fighter by Mr. Eric S. Ryberg, 26-27 Feb 2002 http://handle.dtic.mil /100.2/ADA399988 The Influence of Ship Configuration on the Design of the Joint Strike Fighter http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA399988&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf - “SHIP SUITABILITY DESIGN ‘PENALTY’ page 10 of 11 Because of the numerous factors that influence the design of a ship- based aircraft, many assume these considerations have significantly compromised the mission performance of the CV and STOVL vari- ants. Correspondingly, it is assumed that the remaining CTOL variant carries appreciable "scar impacts" to maintain commonality with its sea-going siblings. However, the JSF design solution has been quite successful in minimizing the "penalty" of ship suitability...... the CTOL variant carries virtually no scars as the result of the ship suitability of the other two variants. The JSF program has clear- ly shown that shipboard compatibility does not have to come at the expense of such critical attributes as lethality & survivability....” 3UHSDULQJIRUWDNHRII the aircraft to roll out on a reciprocal over the landing spot, using the lon- Management of the CVF/JCA ship/ heading (approximately 1.5 n miles gitudinal and lateral deck markings air interface is a joint endeavour 8.UDPSVXS-6)FDU abeam the ship) to perform the visual for line-up (the correct hover height between the Defence Equipment ULHULQWHJUDWLRQHIIRUW circuit. is indicated by the Height Indicator and Support organisation’s JCA Towards the end of the turn, hav- and Hover Aid Thermometer [HIHAT] Integrated Project Team (IPT) and 'DWH3RVWHG 'HF ing throttled back to bring the aircraft fixed to the forward island). the CVF programme (delivered ,QWHUQDWLRQDO'HIHQFH5HYLHZ to a speed below 250 kt, Tomlinson The aircraft descends vertically through the Aircraft Carrier Alliance KWWS PLOLWDU\QXWVFRPLQGH[ presses a single switch on the right- onto the flight deck and once safely [ACA]), with roles and responsibilities SKS"VKRZWRSLF VW hand sidestick controller to transition on board Tomlinson is directed to apportioned according to an internal the F-35B to STOVL flight mode. taxi clear of the landing runway to a business agreement. While the main A range of simulation, modelling, During conversion, the doors cover- specified parking spot. human resource supporting this risk-reduction and technology-dem- ing the lift fan and surrounding the Of course, it will be some years activity actually resides in the ACA, onstration activities are under way to three-bearing swivel duct automatically before the F-35B — the UK’s preferred the JCA IPT holds the funding and is optimise the safety and operability open and both propulsion effectors choice to meet its Joint Combat Aircraft responsible for an integration con- of the ship/air interface between the vector to an appropriate angle. (JCA) requirement — commences tract flowed through to the Lockheed UK’s new aircraft carriers and the At the end of the conversion, first-of-class flying trials from Queen Martin-led Team JSF via the US JSF F-35B Joint Strike Fighters that will the aircraft is configured for semi- Elizabeth. Only a single F-35B develop- Program Office (JPO). The main operate from them. Richard Scott jetborne flight. Tomlinson selects ment test aircraft (BF-1) has flown, and rationale for this arrangement is that reports: landing gear down in readiness for the first steel for Queen Elizabeth will the JCA IPT already has a formal BAE Systems’ lead test pilot recovery. not be cut until early 2009. relationship with the JPO, whereas Graham Tomlinson is at the controls He now initiates a final descending Even so, intensive work is already the ACA does not. of the F-35B Lightning II, the short turn shortly after passing the stern of under way to de-risk the ship/air Commander Andy Lison, CVF take-off, vertical-landing (STOVL) Queen Elizabeth, rolling out onto the interface between CVF and JCA — no- Aviation Manager within the Ministry variant of the Joint Strike Fighter same heading as the ship at a range tably the recovery manoeuvre and of Defence’s (MoD’s) Capital Ships (JSF). Up ahead he sees the wake, of approximately 1.5 n miles. Using associated landing aids — through Directorate, and today firmly and then the large grey bulk, of HMS the glide slope and line-up cues modelling, simulation, technology embedded within the Aircraft Carrier Queen Elizabeth, the first of the UK provided by the ship’s visual landing demonstration and risk reduction tri- Alliance (ACA), is conscious that the Royal Navy’s (RN’s) two new 65,000- aids, together with helmet-mounted als. In addition, wide-ranging studies transition of the carrier programme tonne displacement Future Carrier display symbology, the aircraft comes have been performed to characterise, from design to manufacture means (CVF) vessels. onto a three-degree decelerating evaluate and define detailed aspects that the time has come to take some Flying to Visual Flight Rules (VFR), approach before being brought to a of the flight deck and aviation sup- critical decisions. “CVF will be the Tomlinson is in a ‘slot’ designated by stabilised hover, at the same forward port infrastructure so as to optimise world’s first big deck STOVL carrier, the ship’s Flyco (Flying Control) as speed as the carrier, alongside the the safety and capability of the ship, and the first ship to be designed he prepares to recover to the carrier designated deck landing spot. aircraft and deck parties in what around JSF,” he points out, adding: deck. Overflying the starboard side of Tomlinson now translates laterally, is a highly dynamic and potentially “That presents us with both an oppor- Queen Elizabeth at an altitude of 600 from abeam, to reposition his aircraft hazardous operating environment. tunity and a challenge.” ft in wingborne flight, he then banks 7RXFKSRLQWPDWUL[ a weekly basis, been ‘nailing down’ The cockpit has been modified A three-dimensional visual model The opportunity comes from the the detailed design of the ships. to provide a field-of-view, from pilot of CVF was developed from general ability to optimise the ship for the This means we will go with the data eye-position, which is representa- arrangement data supplied by the aircraft, while the challenge arises we have at each ‘touchpoint’ today, tive of the F-35B. Active side-stick ACA. The level of detail incorporated from the need to manage CVF and move forward with the ship, under- and throttle units have also been in the ship model, which includes JCA vis-à-vis their development stand the interface, and quantify the installed; to the same design as will the location and characteristics programmes and design maturity. residual risk according to how mature be used in the F-35 pilot training of the deck markings and visual Cdr Lison says: “While the aircraft the data is.” simulators. In most other respects landing aids, is an important factor and its accompanying operations The vertical recovery vignette the cockpit is generic (for example, in creating a realistic and immersive and support architecture continue to previously described has already the head-down multifunction displays cueing environment for the pilot. A iterate, we are at a point in the ship been ‘flown’ many times by JSF are presented on three small LCD number of static F-35Bs and Merlin programme where we have to stop test pilots in a high-fidelity simula- panels, rather than on a single large- helicopters have been positioned on designing and start building. That tion environment at BAE Systems’ format display as in the F-35). the flight deck in a typical ‘deck-park’ demands that we closely manage Motion Dome Simulator at Warton, Four Canon SXGA+ (1,400x1,050) arrangement. the ship/air interface and attendant Lancashire. Here, through the use of liquid crystal on silicon projectors As part of the baseline System programme risks.” piloted simulation, a huge amount of are used to project the ‘outside Development and Demonstration The primary mechanism to qualitative and quantitative data has world’ onto the dome surface, with (SDD) programme, a comprehensive achieve this is through the integra- been gathered, in a safe and repeat- the image from each projector non-linear simulation of the F-35B tion contract. “We have developed able environment, to inform the blended to produce a continuous has been developed using the ATLAS a ‘touchpoint’ grid matrix to show CVF/JCA integration process well in field-of-view (220 degrees in azimuth (Analysis, Trim, Linearize and Simu- where the ship needs data on the advance of first-of-class testing and by 50 degrees in elevation). Each late) tool developed by Lockheed aircraft to inform its design,” explains without the need to resort to costly graphics channel is rendered on a Martin Aeronautics. To develop the Cdr Lison. “What the integration physical mock-ups or flight trials. separate dual-processor PC using real-time simulation, the various contract enables us to do is to reach Housed in a large-diameter dome, Nvidia GeForce 8800 GTX graphics ATLAS subsystems have been reused forward in the aircraft development the simulator itself features a cockpit hardware. via an interface wrapper. programme and get visibility of mounted on a six-axis motion plat- The outside world visuals are those data elements that we need to form, with a high resolution outside generated using a software applica- 6LPXODWLRQVXFFHVV understand the architecture of JSF world image projected onto the tion developed by the Simulation The only modification to the original and its requirements relative to the dome’s interior surface. This differs Group, interfacing with the Vega SDD simulation has been the addition ship. These considerations include from conventional practice (where Prime Toolset. Vega Prime offers the of a CVF specific ship model. This cooling, power, bandwidth, acoustics, the cockpit is encapsulated inside capability to extend the tool through mathematical model consists of a thermal effects, jetwash, logistics a smaller dome mounted on top of a series of application-specific ‘plug- defined geometry (including deck footprint, weapons and electromag- a motion platform) so as to offer in’ modules (such as a marine module layout and ski-jump ramp profile), netic compatibility. benefits in terms of a reduction in used to generate a realistic seascape, a ship motion model to represent “We are now at a point in the car- platform payload and corresponding including dynamic sea surface and the sea-keeping characteristics of rier programme where we have, on increase in dynamic performance. water wakes). the vessel, and an air-wake model to capture the effects of the ship’s structure on the flow field around doubt. The UK requirement calls CV approach, offering increased payoff of the manoeuvre in terms and downwind of the vessel. for a recovery in hot day conditions clearance over the stern and less of increased bring back, but also Speaking at the Royal Aeronautical with a 4,080 lb payload (essentially touchdown scatter. The touchdown threw up four key areas demanding Society’s International Powered two precision- guided bombs, two position on the axial flight deck is further examination: performance (as Lift Conference (IPLC 2008) in July AIM-120 missiles and a fuel reserve). about 150 ft from the stern, similar affected by variables such as deck 2008, BAE Systems’ F-35B project Current projections predict a to that of a conventional carrier. run, wind over deck, aerodynamic lift test pilot Pete Wilson praised the performance shortfall of about 175 lb, No arrestor gear is required. and thrust margin); carrier design; simulation environment. “Legacy although this could increase to 360 Instead, the aircraft brakes are used operational issues (such as sortie simulations were nowhere near good lb if only the US Marine Corps’ less to bring the aircraft to a stop. generation rate); and safety. enough,” he told delegates. “But the stressing Key Performance Parameter Low-key studies to investigate Further feasibility investigations reality of the very high resolution is delivered. the SRVL technique were initiated were conducted in 2000-01 using environment created in the Motion As a result, the MoD has been by the MoD in the late 1990s, but generic aircraft and ship models. Dstl Dome Simulator has surpassed both exploring the adoption of the SRVL the work has latterly taken on a also ran a two-day safety workshop industry and customer expectations. manoeuvre — essentially a running much higher profile after the MoD’s in late 2001. This showed that there That said, there is still some room for landing onto the carrier deck — to Investments Approvals Board (IAB) in were no “showstoppers, and no improvement, notably in the areas of improve bring-back performance. July 2006 directed that SRVL should SRVL-specific safety critical systems air wake and weather.” SRVL exploits the ability of the F-35B be included in future development were identified”, said Rosa. “Also, the A number of simulator trials have to use vectored thrust to slow the of the JCA design to mitigate the ability to ditch weapons and carry out been ‘flown’ to date. In December speed of the aircraft approach to risk to KUR 4. Accordingly, the JCA a vertical landing instead of an SRVL 2007, work was undertaken to assess about 35 kt of closure relative to the IPT amended the CVF integration in the event of a failure was seen as vertical landings and shipborne carrier (assuming a forward airspeed contract in mid-2008 to include this a powerful safety mitigation.” rolling vertical landings (SRVLs) so of 60 kt and 25 kt wind over deck) requirement. During 2002, more representative as to inform landing aid develop- while still gaining the benefit of Addressing IPLC 2008, Martin F-35B information became available ment. Investigations into the field of wingborne lift. This in turn offers the Rosa, JSF technical coordinator which altered assumptions with regard offered by the F-35’s distrib- possibility of a significant increase in Dstl’s air and weapon systems respect to aircraft ‘bring back’ uted aperture electro-optical sensor (estimated at over 2,000 lb) in bring department, said the SRVL studies angle of attack (from 16 degrees to system were also carried out. back compared to a vertical recovery. to date had shown “a way forward about 12 degrees, so reducing the Further trials were performed in SRVL could also reduce propulsion exists to achieving operationally use- lift co-efficient); wing area (revised July 2008. These were predominantly system stress to increase operational ful increases in bring-back, compared downwards from 500 ft2 to 460 ft2, SRVLs to further inform the VLA flexibility and propulsion system life. to a vertical landing, on board CVF reducing lift available on approach design process. with an appropriate level of safety”. at a given speed by 8 per cent); and The MoD is acutely aware that 659/PDQRHXYUH Dstl began early work to examine jet effects in the SRVL speed range the ability of the F-35B to meet As currently conceptualised, an the feasibility of employing the SRVL (which were significantly greater than JCA Key User Requirement (KUR) 4, aircraft executing an SRVL approach manoeuvre in 1999. According to those in the hover). which sets out a vertical recovery will follow a constant glidepath (five Rosa, an initial pre-feasibility inves- Aggregated, these revised bring back threshold, remains in to six degrees) to the deck. This tigation demonstrated the potential assumptions significantly reduced angle is about twice that of a normal predicted bring back performance. representative air and ground model. Other forthcoming work will (VLAs) for both fixed- and rotary- Even so, the improvement offered by The results indicated that, at night or include further investigations on wing aircraft. an SRVL recovery was still substantial in higher sea states (above Sea State an SRVL clearance aboard CVF, The GLIS system, based on two and MoD interest continued. 3), an SRVL-specific approach aid optimisation of the approach profile, night-vision goggle-compliant stabi- In the 2003-04 timeframe, Lock- was desirable, and Ship Referenced reaching an agreement on the opti- lised Glide Path Indicator (GPI) units, heed Martin became formally engaged Velocity Vector (SRVV) symbology in mal post-touchdown technique, and is the primary source of information in the investigation of SRVL recovery, the pilot’s helmet-mounted display mitigation for failure cases such as a available to the pilot for establishing with the JPO contracting with Team was an enhancing feature. burst tyre on touchdown. and maintaining the correct glide JSF for a study into methods for One significant outcome of the Work is also to continue to mature slope during the approach. These Enhanced Vertical Landing Bring Back. JCA Review Note promulgated by the the SRVL-optimised VLA arrange- GPI units are positioned at either end Once again, safety and performance IAB in July 2006 was the decision ments, look at the possible ‘tuning’ of the ship, in the port catwalk level characteristics were considered to add an SRVL capability into the of the JSF flight control laws, and with the flight deck. High intensity broadly encouraging. “However,” overall SDD programme. Significant further study the effect of SRVL on drop-line lights, mounted on the stern pointed out Rosa, “at this stage work work has been performed since then, the CVF sortie generation rate, Rosa of the ship, provide line-up cues. on the adaptable CVF design was including land-based flight trials and said, while acknowledging that the Each GPI is essentially a high inten- progressing rapidly.... Consequently extensive simulator-based develop- “exact scope of capability is only likely sity sectored light projector. The glide the obvious next step was to consider ment and evaluation. to be confirmed after First of Class slope of the aircraft, relative to the the detailed impacts that SRVL might As part of this work, QinetiQ was Flying Trials” aboard CVF. GLIS, determines which coloured light have on the CVF design.” in 2007 contracted to use its Harrier sector is visible to the pilot. If the pilot T.4 Vectored-thrust Advanced Aircraft 5$<2)/,*+7 &203/(0(17$ is flying down the optimum glide slope %DFNWRUHDOLW\ Control (VAAC) testbed to perform 5<9/$62/87,216)25$/7(5 (nominally three degrees) a steady Accordingly, the CVF IPT (now representative land-based flight trials 1$7,9(5(&29(5<02'(6 green light is visible. If the approach subsumed into the wider ACA) in and a ship-based SRVL demonstra- The purpose of a landing aid system is too high a flashing green light is 2005 put in place a package of work tion. The latter saw the VAAC aircraft is to assist the pilot during approach visible. Alternatively, if the approach to investigate SRVL impact on the perform a series of SRVL recoveries and recovery to the ship by day is too low a red light will be visible. A carrier design. aboard the French carrier Charles de or night. As baselined for STOVL G steady red light indicates a slightly This comprised three workstrands: Gaulle in June 2007. operations (with emphasis on a L low approach and a flashing red light analysis to establish the optimal SRVL According to the MoD, these flight vertical recovery manoeuvre), the indicates a very low approach. recovery deck; sortie generation rate trials “demonstrated that SRVL was a CVF design includes a Glide-slope I HIHAT consists of 11 lights fitted modelling; and MITL simulator trials safe recovery method to the ship at and Long-range Line-up Indicator in a vertical stack with two standard to establish the most appropriate Sea State 6 in day, visual conditions”, System (GLIS), a HIHAT and light S deck lights mounted horizontally, recovery profile, analyse VLAs and although it added that Charles de emitting diode flight deck lighting. one either side of the stack, at the measure landing scatter. Gaulle is a “particularly stable ship” AGI has been contracted by the ACA optimum aircraft hover height (which Two separate simulation trials and there is “no ship motion data to to supply these as part of a GBP7.5 aligns to the fourth vertical light, thus were conducted at BAE Systems’ enable comparison to how CVF will million (USD11.5 million) contract resulting in three lights above this Warton facility using a repre- react in the same sea conditions”. for the supply of visual landing aids position and seven below). sentative CVF ship model and a JSF Light output from each of the To this end QinetiQ has undertaken operations at sea is widely credited cases (in terms of aircraft configura- vertical lights is designed such that research into a new VLA concept, to Lieutenant Commander Doug tions and environmental condition it can only be seen when level with known as the Bedford Array, which Taylor RN. His thesis, written while thresholds). Other ground rules such or above the centre line of the light; takes inputs from inertial references studying for a PhD at the University as take-off distances, maximum ramp it cannot be seen from below this to stabilise against deck motions of Southampton in the early 1970s, length and height constraints, wind level. Thus if the unit is viewed at (pitch and heave). identified the substantial gains in over deck speeds and ship motion the optimum hover height then a T A trial of the concept was under- payload radius achieved if an aircraft factors were also generated prior to shape, consisting of the vertical stack taken aboard the aircraft carrier HMS performing a short takeoff — such the main analysis which was based of lights horizontal deck lights, will be Illustrious in November 2008, with as the Harrier with thrust vector- on legacy experience with Harrier seen. Moving above this position will QinetiQ using its Harrier T.4 VAAC ing — was launched upwards on a analysis, Team JSF ‘best practice’, result in more vertical lights being testbed to fly approaches to a dem- semi-ballistic trajectory. sensitivity studies of performance observed and a decrease in height onstration Bedford Array mounted on The ski-jump ramp works by and loads to identify sensible values will have the opposite effect, though the ship. For the purposes of the trial, imparting an upward vertical velocity and ranges. the horizontal reference will still be the lighting array was installed in the and ballistic profile to the aircraft, Based on predicted F-35B visible. The spacing of the lights will port catwalk adjacent to Illustrious’s providing additional time to acceler- performance and landing gear loads also give a clear indication as to the flight deck. The VAAC Harrier did not ate to flying speed whilst ensuring data, the CVF ski-jump was defined rate of ascent or descent as more actually perform SRVL recoveries it is on a safe trajectory. This as a 12.5 degrees angled ramp, with lights are illuminated or extinguished, to the ship owing to the limited additional time is manifested either in the profile achieved by combining a and the rate at which this occurs. dimensions of the flight deck, but a reduced take-off length for a given nominal profile based on a quartic fit Whilst the HIHAT is primarily flew representative SRVL approach weight, or increased launch weight to an optimum cubic transition plus intended to be used once the aircraft profiles to the catwalk array (down (fuel and/or ordnance) for a fixed circular arc, a rounded step lead in is over the deck and in the hover to a safety height of about 40 ft take-off distance. and an elliptic let down. Analyses phase of the flight, it is anticipated above deck) to evaluate its ability This additional performance does have also confirmed that fatigue that pilots will acquire the HIHAT to accurately indicate an SRVL glide not come for free, however, with a impact as a result of cyclical loading at anything up to 0.5 n miles from scope aimpoint to the SRVV. significant increase in landing gear was significantly less than that for the ship. The system is intended to A second lighting array was rigged loads above those of a standard take the legacy Invincible-class ramp; complement the information obtained on the carrier flight deck itself. This off, which are very low compared to a and that minimum weapons physical from GLIS and between them will was used for a parallel evaluation landing. The increase represents the clearance limits were met even in provide a complete visual approach of the visual acuity of the lighting energy transferred to the aircraft as worst cases (combinations of flat aid for a vertical recovery. system on deck. it translates up the ramp; and if the tyres and compressed struts). With SRVL now likely to be used angle and curvature of the ramp are as a recovery technique on board increased to obtain greater perform- $1(:$1*/( 237,0,6,1*7+( 237,0,6,1*+($/7+6$)(7< CVF, there is an additional require- ance benefit, so are the loads. 6.,-803352),/()25&9) $1'3(5)250$1&(,17+( ment to augment the baseline VLA The origin of the ski-jump ramp An essential first step for optimis- )/,*+7'(&.(19,5210(17 suite with a landing aid appropriate now widely fitted to aircraft carriers ing the ski-ramp profile for CVF was Extensive modelling and simula- to the SRVL approach manoeuvre. undertaking fixed-wing STOVL air to define key performance and load tion work has been performed to characterise the CVF flight deck were represented as surfaces of the deck operations. [Small Business Innovation Research] environment, bearing in mind that correct exit area with a pressure In the final analysis, the decision effort being sponsored by the Naval interleaved launch and recovery and and temperature boundary condition has been taken to delete the JBD Air Systems Command. Under these simultaneous turnaround (taxiing, applied. This was calculated from an from the STOVL CVF design. Cdr efforts, ATI/Aegisound is developing parking, servicing, fuelling and arm- extensive dataset supplied by Team Lison explains: “We determined from deep ear insert active noise reduc- ing) activities must co-exist within JSF through the JCA integration the CFD modelling that the legacy tion sets to equip deck crews on US a constrained four-acre estate. The contract and checked by comparing JBD did not offer adequate protection. carriers in the near field. Our current need to ensure a safe working envi- the exhaust mass flow and thrust Alternative designs were considered intention is to buy into this as appro- ronment for personnel on deck has predicted by the CFD. which offered some benefit, but priate for UK requirements.” come in for particular scrutiny given Results showed that the large two considerations persuaded us to Another area of continuing the jet wash and near-field acoustic efflux mass flow associated with the delete the requirement. research is flight deck coatings. “We impacts associated with the F-35B. F-35B lift fan hits the flight deck at “First, the nozzle scheduling of the have already conducted trials of Under contract to the ACA, an angle and spreads out sideways F-35B on take-off has yet to be fully some candidate coatings using a Frazer Nash Consultancy (FNC) used and backwards, pushed behind the established, and there was a risk that sub-scale jet engine in BAE Systems’ transient computational fluid dynamic aircraft and then curling up into the jet blast would simply ‘bounce’ over hot gas lab at Warton,” says Cdr (CFD) modelling to map the jet blast vortices either side of the strong the JBD. Second, the JBD was in a Lison. “We are also liaising with the impact of a JCA on launch, and central jet from the core nozzle. single fixed position on the flight deck, US Office of Naval Research to gain evaluate measures to improve flight CFD analysis showed that the JBD so there was no flexibility with regard maximum value from combined deck operational performance with provided some protection to the aft to the length of the take-off run.” US-UK efforts.” minimal impact to the ship design. flight deck at the start of the launch Work has also been carried out He adds: “Existing formulations This involved evaluating the protec- but was less effective as the aircraft to map the acoustic footprint on will not withstand the intense heat tion offered by the legacy flat plate moved down the launch runway. deck: noise is a major health and of the F-35B jet blast, so the ACA, Mk 7 Jet Blast Deflector (JBD) and a Protection is particularly poor on the safety consideration, given that deck working with paint consultants number of variations to this layout. port aft quarter of the deck. personnel in close proximity to the Safinah, has developed a high level CFD modelling was used to FNC subsequently investigated six JCA on take-off will be subject to specification for a coating that simulate the engine power and accel- alternative JBD layouts in an effort increased sound levels above the addresses requirements for corrosion eration of the JCA along the launch to identify a solution offering better legacy Harrier. Acoustic shelters are protection, heat and blast resistance, runway, with the exclusion zones protection to personnel on the aft deck. incorporated in the CVF design, while co-efficient of friction, ease of appli- generated by the hot high-velocity Its optimised configuration afforded a deck personnel in the near field will cability, impact tolerance, and cost at exhausts visualised, and peak values better level of protection for personnel be equipped with advanced hearing application and through life. at key personnel locations were on the port aft flight deck, although an protection devices. “This specification will be promul- monitored throughout the launch. exclusion zone would still be required “It’s an issue we take very seri- gated to paint/coatings suppliers to A CVF model suitable for transient on the flight deck where the jet wash ously because of the potential for see what they can deliver. We believe CFD analysis was developed from is deflected outboard and where it permanent damage to hearing,” there is a product out there that an existing air wake model. The propagates around the starboard side says Cdr Lison, adding: “We’ve meets our needs, but not necessarily F-35B was not modelled explicitly; of the JBD. Nevertheless, the size of looked across the Atlantic to the JSF one that is currently marketed as instead the core nozzle and lift fan the exclusion zone would not limit flight programme and beyond to a SBIR flight deck paint.” platforms. The F-35 sensor suite capabilities as the F-35A and F-35C. Making the STOVL includes a highly advanced AESA Same radar, same EOTS, same F-35B Work for the ADF radar (AN/APG-81), a fully integrated EW suite, same DAS, same LO Steve George, Feb 2015 electro optical targeting and sensing technology. The key message is Defence Technology Review system (EOTS; such systems are that the F-35B is an exceptionally pod mounted on legacy aircraft capable aircraft. However, it’s STEVE GEORGE TAKES AN IN-DEPTH LOOK AT THE TECHNICAL INTEGRATION ISSUES OF such as the F-16 and F/A-18), a absolutely true that the addition OPERATING THE F-35B JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER large electronic warfare (EW) suite RI6729/FDSDELOLW\KDVDϑHFWHG FROM AUSTRALIA’S CANBERRA-CLASS LHD. of passive radio frequency sensors, capability in three areas: range, ‘g’ To date, most of the on line and an integrated dual band infrared and weapon bay size. So let’s look at discussions about the value and (lR) distributed aperture system these areas. practicality of this option have (DAS; AN/AAQ-37) that combines The F-35B’s combat range key lacked complete information and missile warning with lR imaging performance parameter (KPP) technical depth; in many cases, functions. The aircraft are also requirement is 450nm against the the ‘information’ has been wholly equipped with a highly advanced )$¶V QP7KLVUHÀHFWVWKH inaccurate. This short brief is data link system. All of these are reality of losing internal space to the intended to help DTR readers gain a highly advanced in technology and lift fan system, and was understood better appreciation of the issues. performance, and will give the F-35 ZKHQWKH.33VZHUH¿UVWDJUHHG JSF family tremendously improved around 2000. However, the point F-35B and the Capability Question situational awareness (SA) in of the STOVL aircraft is that it is Much has been made of the operations. intended to be deployed on ships, ‘limited’ capability of the F-35B JSF The F-35 JSF family also exploit closer to its targets. This logic would compared to the land-based F-35A low observable (LO) technology to apply to any Australian Defence FRQYHQWLRQDOWDNHRϑDQGODQGLQJ an extent not previously achieved on Force (ADF) use of the aircraft from variant. So let’s put it in perspective. tactical aircraft. The LO techniques the Canberra-class LHD. The F-35B The F-35 JSF family of aircraft DQGVROXWLRQVRQWKH)UHÀHFW DOVRKDVWKHVDPHKLJKO\ÀH[LEOH represent a major step forward in years of development and hard ‘probe’ refuelling system as the tactical aircraft combat capability, won experience on previous US F-35C, enabling it to be refuelled by and they achieve this primarily platforms, and will give the F-35 a a wide range of potential national through a massive advance in decisive edge in combat. and coalition tanker aircraft. the gathering and exploitation of So, it’s important to realise that Interestingly, ‘g’ requirements information, collected by their own as far as SA and LO are concerned, were not included as F-35 KPPs, sensors or data linked from other the F-35B has exactly the same and so have been traded against 1 KPPs and other higher priority the reality of STOVL challenges or ‘critical’ shortfalls. But – and requirements. ‘G’ values are and called for the F-35B to carry a the value of this ‘ but’ cannot be dependent on aircraft weight, 1,000lb joint Direct Attack Munition overestimated – in many scenarios, FRQ¿JXUDWLRQDOWLWXGHVSHHGDQG (JDAM) internally, as opposed to the it delivers the important capability a number of other factors, so 2,000lb JDAM requirement for F-35A to operate from a ship much closer any comparison between the two and C variants. to the required area of operations. variants is likely to be simplistic. Early F-35B designs attempted to Our defence leaders have to decide However, it does appear that the achieve a ‘common’ 2,000lb capable ZKHWKHUWKDWLVDFDSDELOLW\WUDGHRϑ F-35B has a typical sustained turn weapons bay, but reality caught up worth making. rate of around 4.5g, with the F-35A with Lockheed Martin around 2004, So let’s look at the other main ¿JXUHEHLQJDURXQGJ7KLVLV and the F-35B reverted to a smaller area of contention – the practicality probably due to the F-35B’s airframe ‘KPP compliant’ bay. However, the of putting the F-35B on the being optimised for the lowest F-35B can still carry 2,000lb JDAMs ‘Canberra’ class LHDs. possible landing weight, and the externally if required, and in any additional drag of the lift fan system case, the need for these very large Integrating Aircraft and Ships fairing. weapons is infrequent: recent It’s best to start by understanding There will be impassioned operations show that 500lb class air- that putting military aircraft DUJXPHQWVDURXQGWKLVGLϑHUHQFH to-ground munitions are the most on ships has never been easy. but there is no doubt that the frequently used by a large margin. Warships, even the massive US irnportance of raw ‘g’ in air combat Again, this drop in heavy ordnance Navy (USN) nuclear-powered aircraft HϑHFWLYHQHVVKDVGURSSHGPDUNHGO\ capability would not likely be a deal carriers, are not and never will be over recent decades in favour of breaker for the (ADF). MXVWµÀRDWLQJDLU¿HOGV¶±WKHUDZ improved SA. The LO capable F-35B, ,QDQ\HYHQWWKH)%RϑHUV constraints of physical space have possessing exceptional SA and a tremendous step forward in driven naval aviators to develop armed with the AIM-120C Advanced STOVL capability compared with new ways of launching, recovering, Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile and WKDWRϑHUHGE\WKH+DUULHUIDPLO\ arming, maintaining and repairing new generation short-range air-to- of aircraft, which have, for over 30 aircraft since the earliest days. air missiles, plus a sustained turn \HDUVGHOLYHUHGKLJKO\HϑHFWLYH But they have consistently rate much better than legacy STOVL combat capability all over the globe. VXFFHHGHG(ϑHFWLYHVDIHDQG aircraft, will be a highly capable air So, it’s true that, in some sustainable embarked air power has combat adversary. respects, the F-35B has more limited been demonstrated from a wide Finally, weapons bay capacity. capability than the F-35A. But variety of ship/aircraft combinations $JDLQWKHRULJLQDO.33VUHÀHFWHG these do not appear to be ‘decisive’ over the past 100 years. Maritime 2 ¿[HGZLQJDYLDWLRQLVDQDFKLHYDEOH LGHQWL¿FDWLRQDQGQRWOHDVW ÀLJKWGHFNVDQGVSDFHVDUHQRW art – and STOVL makes it even the means of exploiting the dissimilar to those on the LHDs, more achievable. intelligence, surveillance and although they do not have the Successful maritime aviation reconnaissance outputs from the EHQH¿WRIDVNLMXPS depends on a little known discipline F-35B. Also includes the required 7KHVHFRQGLVWKDWWKH/+'FODVV called ‘ship/aircraft integration’. guidance systems for launch and on which the Canberra-class This is a systems engineering recovery; has been based has also been challenge, requiring thorough 7KHVXSSRUWLQWHUIDFH±KRZ designed with F-35B in mind. The understanding and control of the the ship provides the required original Spanish Juan Carlos l various interfaces between the ship support capabilities to the aircraft, design was required from the and the aircraft. So, how closely are including fuel, weapons and outset to embark the F-358, and the F-35B and the LHD interfaces maintenance. A key driver for detailed technical information was currently aligned? Remember, it’s manpower requirements as well as made available from the US to been regularly asserted that the KDQJDUDQGÀLJKWGHFNOD\RXWV Spain to assist in this process. All LHD is ‘not designed to operate the The important issue of personnel these requirements were retained F-35B’ or that the F-35B ‘will not be in the two Canberra-class LHDs. compatible’ with the LHD. To assess requirements for F-35B operations the practicability question, we need will also be examined. Let’s take So, looking at F-35B launch and to understand the various types of each of these issues in turn, and see UHFRYHU\WKH/+'ÀLJKWGHFNZRXOG ship/aircraft interface. They can be how much is known from publicly DOORZVKRUWWDNHRϑ 672 ODXQFKHV grouped as follows: available information. at required mission weights without the ski-jump. With the ski jump – 7KHRSHUDWLQJLQWHUIDFH±ODXQFKLQJ The Operating lnterface DOUHDG\IDFWRU\¿WWHG±VDIHUDQG and recovering, including At the outset, it’s vital to appreciate PRUHHϑHFWLYH KLJKHUZHLJKW PRYHPHQWDURXQGWKHÀLJKWGHFN two very salient facts. launches will be possible. We are with ship motion; 7KH¿UVWLVWKDWWKH)%KDV looking at something in the order 7KHHQYLURPQHQWDOLQWHUIDFH± EHHQVSHFL¿FDOO\GHVLJQHGWR of 1,500kg of extra payload with includes aircraft weight, size, jet operate from ships like the LHD. no penalty except a safer take- blast and noise; It has had to meet requirements Rϑ5HPHPEHUWKDWWKHDLUFUDIWLV 7KHLQIRUPDWLRQLQWHUIDFH± for operating from USN Wasp- VSHFL¿FDOO\UHTXLUHGWREHDEOHWR becoming a major aspect, includes class amphibious assault ships, as launch from ski-jumps. the required mission support ZHOODVVRPH8.VSHFL¿FDWLRQVIRU )RUODQGLQJVWKH)%¶VÀLJKW systems, communication and ski jump launches. Wasp-class control system has been carefully 3 designed to allow safe and accurate become a contentious issue, so from these has informed existing recovery to small deck areas with let’s address that. Since the advent HϑRUWVWRGHYHORSEHWWHUÀLJKW low pilot workload in all conditions. of maritime jet aircraft, handling deck coatings and noise protection The nose wheel steering and engine MHWEODVWLQWKHFRQ¿QHGVSDFHRID measures. It should also be controls also support aircraft ship has been a major issue. USN understood that the way F-35B’s movement on small or congested carriers carry large and complex jet powered lift system works means ÀLJKWGHFNV EODVWGHÀHFWRUVIRUODXQFKLQJDQG that the main engine exhaust is deck heating on launch was a major operating at approximately half full Summary: the operating interface issue for UK carriers throughout power in ‘powered lift’ mode. This presents low risk. The ski-jump the 1960s and 1970s with the F-4 reduces the scale of the potential RQWKH&DQEHUUDFODVVRϑHUV 3KDQWRP7KH¿UVWJHQHUDWLRQRI problem. VLJQL¿FDQWRSHUDWLRQDODGYDQWDJHV seagoing STOVL aircraft – the While the detailed results of this over USN amphibious assault ship Harrier family – presented far less work are not and cannot be publicly designs and would mitigate the aggressive jet exhausts, but even released, a few important basic )¶VGLϑHUHQWLDOLQSHUIRUPDQFH WKH\SUHVHQWHGFKDOOHQJHVRIÀLJKW statements can be made. compared with the F-35A. deck heating and erosion of the deck Firstly, the F-35B will not melt the coatings. /+'¶VÀLJKWGHFN,WLVSRVVLEOHWKDW The Environmental Interface The much higher landing repeated landings on one spot could The F-35B design was sized by the weight and thrust power of the GHJUDGHH[LVWLQJÀLJKWGHFNFRDWLQJV requirement to use the Wasp-class STOVL F-35B therefore presented However, this issue can be managed ÀLJKWGHFNHOHYDWRUVDQGKDQJDUV a real challenge in achieving the by a combination of managing These are small spaces. It drove the required ability to operate from landings to reduce thermal stress wingspan and length of the aircraft, a wide variety of surfaces and on a single area, or by adoption of landing gear geometry and other environments, including ship improved coatings now arriving on aspects. As we already know, the decks. As a result, the F-35 JSF the scene. The US Marine Corps RAN’s LHD source design accepts programme included a massive is already looking at a ‘creeping’ the F-35B’s weight and size. The HϑRUWWRPRGHOUHSOLFDWHDQG landing technique, which could be elevators, for instance, are sized to XQGHUVWDQGWKHDLUFUDIW¶VMHWHϓX[ used on board, as well as the new 27 tonnes – very near the aircraft’s blast, temperature and noise, and Thermion nonskid deck coating maximum possible weight. So the LWVHϑHFWRQYDULRXVVXUIDFHV system which has characteristics DLUFUDIWZLOO¿WRQERDUGDQGFDQEH This involved full and part scale aimed primarily at dealing with the moved between decks. rig testing, as well as testing with prolonged direct exhaust blasts of But it is F-35B jet blast that has the actual aircraft. The information the F-35B and V-22 Osprey tilt-rotor. 4 Comprised of bonded ceramic and exposure to noise are becoming in generating and using tactical aluminium, Thermion was trialled ever more demanding. The key information to achieve its mission, by the RN as long ago as 2006, and area of concern for F-35 noise particularly in its ability to integrate trialled successfully on USS Wasp, is actually on the F-35C variant, with modern military data networks. ¿UVWLQ2FWREHUDQGWKHQ for deck launching, and a series This means that F-35B mission again in August 2013. Thermion of programmes are under way planning and post-mission analysis is a candidate for being the new to develop improved aural will require information technology standard deck coating on both USN protection systems for USN (IT) systems far beyond anything and RN ships due to its high heat personnel. These are already FXUUHQWO\¿HOGHGE\WKH$')7R resistance properties, improved skid entering service, and the new its credit, the ADF has realised protection and cheaper coat over a equipment will be read across to this, and Plan Jericho, which aims 10 year life cycle. the F-35B. to accelerate the integration of Secondly, the F-35B’s blast can ZDU¿JKWLQJGDWDQHWZRUNVLVD be managed. It’s quite possible Summary: the environmental farsighted and well-aimed initiative that some items of deck equipment interfaces with an F-35B/LHD led by Chief of Air Force Air Marshal currently located around the LHD combination present challenges, *HRϑ%URZQ ÀLJKWGHFNPD\QHHGUHORFDWLRQRU but they are a routine, known and This poses a challenge for any shielding, but this is a normal part PDQDJHDEOHDVSHFWRIQDYDO¿[HG deployed F-35B formation, and RIEULQJLQJDQHZDLUFUDIWWRDÀLJKW wing aviation. integrating the required mission deck; initial Sea Harrier testing on planning and mission support suites the Royal Navy’s Invincible-class The Information Interface – which will operate at a very high ships led to a number of detailed This area has received less attention level of security – with any forward changes. Sensationalist reports that than the rest, and that is a pity, as it base will be a challenge. Fortunately, PRGL¿FDWLRQVWRWKH861:DVS is quite possibly the most important modern warships already possess class ships show ‘severe problems’ and most challenging aspect of any capable communications and or ‘failures’ of the F-35B are simply F-35B/LHD marriage. computing backbones, but the wrong. Remember, putting aircraft The F-35B has exactly the same challenges of integrating the on ships isn’t easy. exceptionally advanced packages F-35B’s lT suite should not be One area that will require of active and passive sensors, underestimated. This would also some attention is noise. There communications links, onboard need to include the Autonomic is little that can be done to computing and weapons systems Logistics Information System (AUS) reduce the noise of a jet engine, as the F-35A and C models. It which is required to manage the and the safety regulations for represents a massive leap forward F-35B’s support systems. 5 Summary: the information interface LHD design changes to The Personnel Equation is probably the most challenging accommodate the F-35B would Another issue raised by those who area of F-35B/LHD integration, and be restricted to any specialist seek to dismiss the possibility WKHPRVWLPSRUWDQWIRUHϑHFWLYHXVH support spaces, and probably to of F-35B/LHD operations is that of the capability at sea. weapons storage and preparation of personnel numbers, and the spaces. There are lessons to be problems of accommodating them The Support Interface learned here from the UK, who on board. Firstly, there is never When military aircraft go to sea, took on the challenge of putting the a direct correlation between the the support arrangements they maintenance intensive Sea Harrier aircraft design and the numbers of XVHDUHYHU\GLϑHUHQWWRWKRVH on board the very small Invincible- personnel used to support it. Other routinely deployed on land bases. FODVVVKLSV6RPHVKXϓLQJRIVSDFHV IDFWRUVVXFKDVUHTXLUHGÀ\LQJUDWHV The constraints of space for both was required, but no major changes DϑHFWWKHVXPVEXWOHVVDSSUHFLDWHG equipment and personnel, and to structure or layout. As ever when factors such as the systems used for WKHWRWDOO\GLϑHUHQWZD\VLQZKLFK aircraft go to sea, there will be maintenance and personnel trade aircraft are prepared, armed and challenges. But a healthy measure VWUXFWXUHVFDQVLJQL¿FDQWO\DϑHFW repaired on board a ship must be of ingenuity and adaptability from deployed numbers. Moreover, when UHÀHFWHGLQWKHGHVLJQRIERWKVKLS service personnel is as important looking at embarked operations, and aircraft. DVWKHGHVLJQVROXWLRQVRϑHUHGE\ the iron law of numbers of beds Fortunately, the F-35B’s industry. available often limits the decisions requirements for support systems It’s also important to note that on numbers. Generally, aircraft units ZHUHH[SOLFLWO\WDLORUHGWRUHÀHFWWKH the F-35B’s avionics suite and designed to operate at sea use less very restricted spaces available in many other critical components personnel than equivalent units the Wasp-class. Interestingly, the are common with the F-35A – this based on land. It has to be stressed tightest constraint on what was should help ensure that spares and that this does not mean that land- called the logistics footprint was repair infrastructure beyond the ship EDVHGXQLWVDUHLQHϒFLHQW±LW¶V applied by the UK. This drove a RSHUDWHVDWDKLJKO\HϒFLHQWOHYHO PRUHWKDWVWDϑVSODQQLQJHPEDUNHG number of hard decisions on the aviation have an in-built culture of design and operation of key aircraft Summary: assertions that the restricting numbers at the outset. and ground support systems. F-35B could not be supported on the And there should be some margin This included key dimensions LHD should be treated with extreme – the LHDs are large ships, and such as height requirements for caution. Operating the F-35B should should have a number of spare bed maintenance and refuelling system certainly be supportable on the LHD spaces available for embarkation of design. without major ship changes. visiting units and support personnel. 6 It would be very surprising if they LHDs. Hopefully, it will serve to from an expert panel of STOVL were already completely full. In inform an important debate, as maritime aviators. Fortunately, any case, a constant experience the ADF and Government put Australia has plenty of these of warships is that the number of WKH¿QLVKLQJWRXFKHVWRWKH rare assets available. They personnel on board increases with Defence White Paper. should be called up now. DTR the years in service. Again, the UK’s $¿QDOWKRXJKW7KHVXEMHFWRI experience may be relevant. The maritime aviation generates emotive Steve George served as an Air Invincible-class saw a rapid increase discussions, often around the (QJLQHHU2ϒFHU $(2 LQWKH5R\DO in total numbers of personnel ownership and control of assets, as Navy for 28 years, achieving the embarked from under 800 to well well as theories of ‘air power’ and its rank of Commander. His service over 1,200. It wasn’t easy, but they application from various bases and career included work with both coped well. whether Australia should or should URWDU\DQG¿[HGZLQJDLUFUDIWDV What should be obvious is the not be in the aircraft carrier game. well as specialist appointments importance of developing the It would be unfortunate if the F-35B/ in weapons procurement and personnel aspects of the challenge LHD debate focussed on these international collaboration with the – successful embarked aviation aspects and ignored the opportunity US. He served on HMS Invincible depends on committed, trained and the ADF has to develop a highly during the Falklands War of 1982, experienced personnel who can ÀH[LEOHDQGHϑHFWLYHFDSDELOLW\WR and subsequently held a range handle the challenges of delivering complement land-based aviation. of appointments associated with FRPEDWDLUSRZHUIURPFRQ¿QHG It is not often appreciated that Harrier operations at sea. moving spaces a long way from maritime aviation has been used He left the Royal Navy in 2002 home. operationally in almost every year and joined BAE Systems as a since World War Two. Every single specialist ship/aircraft integration Summary: F-35B support personnel aircraft shot down by UK armed engineer on the F-35 JSF numbers should not be a deciding IRUFHVVLQFHWKDWFRQÀLFWIHOOWRDQ SURJUDPPHEDVHG¿UVWDW/RFNKHHG factor in whether to embark the aircraft operating from a ship. Today, Martin in Fort Worth, Texas, and aircraft on the LHD. US naval aircraft are delivering a then in the UK. He left BAE Systems VLJQL¿FDQWSURSRUWLRQRIWKHVRUWLHV in 2007 to start his own aerospace Conclusion against IS forces in Iraq and Syria. consulting company, Wisma This brief has attempted to set This is a time for cool heads, Consulting Ltd out some of the technical facts facts and experience. The White http://defencetechnologyreview. surrounding the issues of F-35B Paper’s deliberations on this realviewdigital.com/?iguid=e3f4646a- integration on the Canberra-class LVVXHZRXOGEHQH¿WPDVVLYHO\ c89f-4286-90e2-33bbfb34990b#folio=26 7 http://www.codeonemagazine.com/ gallery_slideshow.html?gallery_id=14 ROLL ‘Going Nozzle Vertical’ LiftFan Vane Nozzle Box NQRZWKH&9)IXWXUHFDUULHUSURMHFWKDVQ¶W H[SHULHQFHLQWKHIDFLOWLHVDW:DUWRQZKLFK Carrier countdown DOZD\VEHHQVPRRWKVDLOLQJ7KH8.*RY- KDVUHVXOWHGLQWKHOHDGLQJHGJHWKDWZH 30 June 2014 Tim Robinson HUQPHQW¶VVZLWFKIURP6729/)%WR&9 KDYHDQGFDQEULQJWREHDURQWKHVHWZR FDWVDQGWUDSV YDULDQWDQGEDFNDJDLQLQ KXJHO\LPSRUWDQWSURJUDPPHV´ 7KLVPRQWKRQ-XO\WKH¿UVWRIWKH8.¶V QRWRQO\ORRNHGOLNHGLWKHULQJDQG 7KRXJKWKH)%¶VDGYDQFHGÀ\E\ QHZ4XHHQ(OL]DEHWKFODVV 4(& FDUULHUV FRVWYDOXDEOHUHVRXUFHVEXWDOVRVHWSURM- ZLUHÀLJKWFRQWUROV\VWHPKDVWDNHQPXFK LVVHWWREHODXQFKHGE\+HU0DMHVW\WKH HFWHQJLQHHUVUDFLQJWRPDNHXSORVWWLPH RIWKHKDUGZRUNRXWRIYHUWLFDOODQGLQJV² 4XHHQ²DQLPSRUWDQWPLOHVWRQHLQUHVWRU- ³7KDWLQWHUUXSWLRQKDVKDGDQHϑHFWRQWKH WKHVLPXODWLRQKDVDOUHDG\SURYHGLWVZRUWK LQJ%ULWDLQ¶VQDYDODLUSRZHU7,052%,1- SURJUDPPHKRZHYHURXUVLPXODWRUPRG- LQKHOSLQJWHVWWKH6KLSERUQH5ROOLQJ9HU- 621WDONVWRVRPHRIWKHHQJLQHHUVUHVSRQ- HOVKDYHKHOSHGWRHDVHWKHWUDQVLWLRQVEH- WLFDO/DQGLQJ 659/ PDQRHXYUHZKLFK VLEOHIRUSXWWLQJWKHµDLU¶LQDLUFUDIWFDUULHU WZHHQDLUFUDIWYDULDQWV´QRWHV$WNLQVRQ LVD8.VSHFL¿FODQGLQJWHFKQLTXHWKDWDO- ³7KHWKLQJWREHDULQPLQGZLWKWKH ORZVKLJKHUµEULQJEDFN¶ VHYHUDOWKRXVDQG 4(&´VD\V'DYLG$WNLQVRQ),QWHJUD- Leveraging simulation SRXQGVDGGLWLRQDOZHLJKW RIZHDSRQVDQG WLRQ/HDG%$(6\VWHPV³LVWKHVKHHUVFDOH ,QWHJUDWLRQRIWKH)ZLWKWKH4(&LQ IXHO²HVSHFLDOO\LQKRWFOLPDWHV659/VHHV RIWKHÀLJKWGHFN,WLVMXVWKXJH²WKUHH SDUWLFXODUKDVKDUQHVVHGWKHJURZLQJ WKHSLORWODQGLQKRYHUPRGHEXWZLWKIRU- WLPHVELJJHUWKDQWKH,QYLQFLEOHFODVV SRZHURIVLPXODWLRQDQGV\QWKHWLFPRGHOOLQJ ZDUGVSHHG²HQDEOLQJWKHZLQJVWRJHQ- GHFN´$WNLQVRQLVSDUWRIWKHLQGXVWU\WHDP WRGHULVNWKHSURFHVV,QVLGHD)PR- HUDWHXVHIXOOLIW8QOLNHDWUDGLWLRQDOFDUULHU WKDWLVZRUNLQJRQWKLVJLDQWÀDJVKLSSURM- WLRQVLPXODWRUDW%$(:DUWRQ¶VIDFLOLW\WHVW DSSURDFKDWNWVZKHUHWKHSLORWLVSUH- HFW7KLV%$(WHDPGLVWLQFWIURPWKHFRP- SLORWVFDQDVVHVVWKHDLUFUDIWLQWKHODQGLQJ SDUHGWRUDPWKHWKURWWOHRSHQLQFDVHRI SDQ\¶VSULPHUROHLQWKH$LUFUDIW&DUULHU$O- SDWWHUQGHYHORS&21236 &21FHSWVRI23- DµEROWHU¶²the SRVL ends with the air- OLDQFH $&$ LVWKHLQWHUIDFHEHWZHHQWKH HUDWLRQ6 DQGWDNHRϑDQGODQGRQDµYLUWX- craft automatically moving the pro- DLUFUDIW ) DQGQDYDOWHDPVZRUNLQJRQ DO¶+064XHHQ(OL]DEHWK7KHVLPXODWLRQLV pulsion system to idle and the pilot WKLVSURMHFW²WRHQVXUHWKDWWKH8.¶VQHZ QRWERXQGWRWKH)%DQG4(&HLWKHU²LW applies the brakes. Input from test pi- VWHDOWK¿JKWHUDQGLWVQHZFDUULHUVPHVKDV FDQDOVRHPXODWH)&DQG&91FKDUDFWHU- lots in the simulator has also added VPRRWKO\DVSRVVLEOH7KHWHDPUHSRUWLQJ LVWLFV$GGLWLRQDOO\WRHQKDQFHUHDOLVPDQG 659/VSHFL¿FV\PERORJ\²Dship-ref- XSWRWKH)-RLQW3URJUDPPH2ϒFHYLD GHYHORSSURFHGXUHVIRUWDNHRϑDQGUHFRY- erenced velocity vector to the pilots /RFNKHHG0DUWLQLVWKH¿UVWµSRUWRIFDOO¶IRU HU\RWKHUPXOWLSOHµYLUWXDO¶)VFDQEHLQ- HMDS (Helmet Mounted Display Sys- $&$DQGWKH0R'IRUTXHVWLRQVDERXW) VHUWHGLQWRWKHVLPXODWLRQV²WRDOORZWKH tem), to better judge the approach LQWHJUDWLRQ6D\V$WNLQVRQ ³2XUUROHLVWR SLORWWRDVVHVVKRZDIRUPDWLRQRIDLUFUDIW path using this recovery technique. KHOSWKH0R'DQG$&$HQVXUHWKH)%LV ZRXOGUHFRYHUWRWKHVKLS6D\V$WNLQVRQ LQWHJUDWHGDVHϒFLHQWO\DQGHϑHFWLYHO\DV ³7KHUHLVDXQLTXHFDSDELOLW\KHUHLQWKH8. Lights, camera, action SRVVLEOHZLWKWKH4(&ODVVDLUFUDIWFDUUL- DW%$(6\VWHPVDW:DUWRQZKLFKLVWRVLP- ,QGHHGWKH659/FRQFHSWKDVDOVRPDGH HU´7KLVKDVLQYROYHGH[WHQVLYHHQJLQHHU- XODWHRSHUDWLRQRIWKH)ZLWKRXURUDQ\- DQRWKHUFKDQJHLQWKH)4(LQWHJUDWLRQ LQJVLPXODWLRQDQGPRGHOOLQJ²JRLQJEDFN ERG\HOVH¶VDLUFUDIWFDUULHUZKRSURYLGHV ²WKDWRIDQHZVWDELOLVHGOLJKWLQJV\VWHPRU DQXPEHURI\HDUV WKHLUPRGHOWRXV´+HREVHUYHV ³,WLVWKH ‘Bedford Array’,QGHSHQGHQWRIWKHWZR +RZHYHUDVGHIHQFHREVHUYHUVZLOO UHVXOWRIPDQ\\HDUVRI>ÀLJKWVLPXODWLRQ@ JOLGHSDWKLQGLFDWRUV IRUERWKKHOLFRSWHUV 1 DQG¿[HGZLQJDLUFUDIW LQWKHSRUWFDWZDON is longer (200ft) than the Invincible- ÀLJKWGHFN²IRUH[DPSOHWKHIULFWLRQFKDU- WKLVSURSULHWDU\V\VWHPGHYHORSHGE\4L- class (150ft) and designed so that the DFWHULVWLFVQHHGHGWRJULSDLUFUDIWW\UHVLQ QHWL4DQGPDQXIDFWXUHGE\$*,/WGXVHV aircraft has all three (including the ZHWFRQGLWLRQV7KHUPDOSURR¿QJPHDVXUHV LED lights in the deck tramlines to pro- nose) wheels in contact right up until VXFKDVKLJKHUWHPSHUDWXUHUHVLVWDQWSDLQWV vide a gyro-stabilised glidepath align- the point where the aircraft leaves the DQGVKLHOGVDOVRH[WHQGVWRWKHFDWZDON ment cue and a forward and aft limit GHFN²JLYLQJSRVLWLYHQRVHZKHHODX- DQGOLIHUDIWV6D\V$WNLQVRQ ³7KHKLVWRULF line to F-35B pilots carrying out SRVL thority throughout. Additionally, the 6729/NQRZOHGJHDQGH[SHULHQFHWKDWZDV approaches. The ‘Bedford Array’ ap- )%VVPDUWÀLJKWFRQWUROV\VWHP GHYHORSHGWKURXJKRXWWKHVWRVKDV proach lighting was trialed with Qinet- ‘knows’ when it is going up a ramp and DOORZHG8.XQGHUVWDQGLQJRIJURXQGHUR- iQ’s VAAC Harrier testbed in 2008.,Q- will pre-position the control surfaces VLRQDQGKRWJDVWREHEURXJKWWREHDURQ GHHGZRUNRQWKH4(&YLVXDOODQGLQJDLGV DQGHϑHFWRUVWRODXQFKDWWKHRSWLPXP WKLVDLUFUDIW¶VVKLSLQWHUIDFH´ JRHVEDFNHYHQIXUWKHUWRWKHYHU\VWDUWRI angle to avoid pitch-up or down. WKH&9)SURJUDPPHDQGWKHVHDLGVKDYH Conclusion EHHQSURJUHVVLYHO\GHYHORSHGXVLQJWKH Thermal challenges $IWHUWKHODXQFKWKHQH[WPLOHVWRQHZLOO :DUWRQÀLJKWVLPXODWRU +RZHYHUWKHELJJHVWHQJLQHHULQJFKDO- VHH+064XHHQ(OL]DEHWKKHDGIRUVHDWUL- 7KHOLJKWLQJRQWKH4(&LVLQQRYDWLYH OHQJHLQ)LQWHJUDWLRQVD\V$WNLQVRQLV DOVLQ7KLVZLOOPRVWOLNHO\VHHWKH LQRWKHUZD\V*LDQW79VW\OHµGHSDUWXUH WKHDHURWKHUPDOHQYLURQPHQWVXUURXQG- ¿UVWDLUFUDIWODQGLQJVRQWKHFDUULHUDOEH- ERDUGV¶RQWKHVLGHRIWKHLVODQGVDOORZLQ- LQJWKHKRWH[KDXVWJDVRIWKH)%DQG LWZLWKKHOLFRSWHUVWRVXSSRUWWKLVDFWLYLW\ IRUPDWLRQ DQGHYHQYLGHR WREHYLHZHG LWVOEWKUXVW)HQJLQH7KLVFKDO- )LUVWURWDU\ZLQJVKLSRSHUDWLQJOLPLWWHVWV E\ÀLJKWGHFNSHUVRQQHORUDLUFUHZVLWWLQJ OHQJHLVQRWQRYHOWRWKH)EXWKDVEHHQ DUHSODQQHGIRU)LUVWRIFODVV¿[HG LQUHDGLQHVV,WFDQDOVRLIQHHGHGSURMHFW NQRZQDERXWVLQFHWKH VDQGWKH ZLQJGHFNWULDOVZLWK)%VIURPWKH86 ZKLWHOLJKWDFWLQJDVÀRRGOLJKWVIRUPDLQWH- +DZNHU6LGGHOH\3ZKHQLWZDVUH- DUHSODQQHGWREHJLQE\WKHHQGRI QDQFHRURWKHURSHUDWLRQVDWQLJKW DOLVHGWKDWDQ\VXSHUVRQLF3+DUULHU DQGWREHFRPSOHWHGLQ OHDGLQJWRDQ IROORZRQZRXOGQHHGH[WUDHϑRUWWRWDFN- ,QLWLDO2SHUDWLQJ&DSDELOLW\LQ Not your father’s ski-jump OHWKLVSUREOHP,QGHHGDVFDOH)KRW 7KXVLQWKH8.ZLOOSRVVHVVD 7KH4(FODVV¶VVNLMXPSWRRKDVEHHQ JDVWHVWULJKDVEHHQXVHGDW:DUWRQIRU VWDWHRIWKHDUWZDUVKLSDQGYDOXDEOHÀRDW- FDUHIXOO\GHVLJQHGDQGHQJLQHHUHGIURP VRPH\HDUVWRH[SORUHWKHDLUFUDIW¶VH[WHU- LQJSLHFHRIUHDOHVWDWH²DEOHWRHPEDUN WKHEHJLQQLQJ²GUDZLQJRQ%$(¶V+DUUL- QDOWKHUPDOHQYLURQPHQW XSWRVWHDOWK)VDQGRUKHOLFRSWHUV HUKHULWDJH6D\V$WNLQVRQ ³:HKDGWRJR )RUWKH4(FODVVWKLVKDVEHHQGHDOW LQFOXGLQJ&KLQRRNV WRSURMHFWSRZHUSUHV- EDFNLQWRWKHDUFKLYHVDQGWDONWRSHRSOH ZLWKLQWKHGHYHORSPHQWRIDWKHUPDOPHWDO HQFHRURϑHUDVVLVWDQFHDQ\ZKHUHLQWKH ZKRKDGDFWXDOO\EHHQLQYROYHGZLWKWULDOV VSUD\WRSURWHFWWKHÀLJKWGHFNDJDLQVW ZRUOG7KLVSRWHQWFDUULHUVWULNHIRUFHUHS- ZLWKWKH6HD+DUULHUDQG+DUULHUWRPDNH KLJKH[KDXVWWHPSHUDWXUHV7KLVVD\V$W- UHVHQWVDPDVVLYHMXPSLQFDSDELOLW\RYHU VXUHZHXQGHUVWRRGWKHKLVWRU\RIVNLMXPS NLQVRQZDVDXQLTXHFKDOOHQJH²ZKLOH WKH,QYLQFLEOH+DUULHUHUD²DQGSHUKDSV UDPSGHYHORSPHQW7KHDLUFUDIWFDUULHUVNL WKHUPDOPHWDOVSUD\H[LVWHGIRUXVHRQDQ LQRQHZD\VHHVWKH8.¶V&9$3 MXPSLVD8.LQQRYDWLRQDQGVRPHWKLQJWKH DLUFUDIWFDUULHULWKDGWRFRPELQHKHDWUH- DPELWLRQVRIWKH VFRPHIXOOFLUFOH 8.LVYHU\SURXGRI´The QEC’s ski-jump VLVWDQWSURSHUWLHVZLWKWKRVHQHHGHGE\D http://aerosociety.com/News/Insight-Blog/2300/Carrier-countdown 2 also conceded a further five-month delay to the date when the Queen Elizabeth can set sail for operational training, to December 2017. The final assembly dock at Rosyth, near Edinburgh, soon to be vacated by the Queen Elizabeth, will immediately be filled with sections of the second carrier, The Prince of Wales. But whether it will enter service, or be sold or stored, depends on next year’s strategic defense review, and the new post-election British government. InI his speech at the naming ceremony, the head of the Royal Navy appeared to pre- empte that decision by stating that he “expected to see a British carrier continuously ready.”r In a flag-waving speech that verged on hyperbole, Admiral Sir George ZambellasZ declared that the Queen Elizabeth “has risen as a steel-clad phoenix…she hash presence, she dwarfs all…a deep expression of our nationhood, of a nation on the rise.”r The trouble is, after the interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan, an increasing British Carrier Remains Controversialersial proportionp of the British public are skeptical of the UK defense establishment’s CHRIS POCOCK http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/ain-defense- continued promotion of expeditionary capability, which finds its greatest expression in perspective/2014-07-18/british-carrier-remains-controversial the “carrier-enabled power projection” of the QE-class. Public opinion has shifted significantly since the carrier project was started in 2007-08. July 18, 2014 Britain’s new aircraft carrier is now afloat, but Perhaps in recognition of this, the ACA is striving to make the carriers as flexible as the total forecast cost of £6.1 billion ($10.4 possible. They can be reconfigured from the strike role, with 12 F-35Bs embarked, to a billion) still threatens to sink other defense ship that can carry 44 helicopters and deploy 1,000 soldiers in amphibious or littoral projects in the UK. To this cost must be added maneuver operations. Moreover, “there is enough storage space to make a real the forecast near £2.5 billion ($4.28 billion) difference in humanitarian operations,” Zambellas said. being contributed by the UK to development and Rear Admiral Russ Harding, the Navy’s senior airman, says that the QE-class initial test and evaluation of the F-35s that will “compresses a 2,000-acre airfield onto a four acre space that is moving in six axes. The Queen Elizabeth aircraft carrier was floated out of its construction dock at Rosyth in Scotland fly from her decks, plus perhaps another £5 Therefore operations have to be intuitive, and they require intensive training.” But the on July 16. (Photo: BAE Systems) billion ($8.56 billion) for their production. UK withdrew its last (and much smaller) aircraft carrier in 2010, thus posing the However, the Royal Navy and the Ministry of Defence (MoD) are taking their cue from danger of “skills fade.” Courtesy of the U.S. Navy British sailors have been deployed in H.M. Queen Elizabeth herself, who, in naming the 65,000-tonne warship in a July 4 small numbers on CV- and LHD-class warships, and pilots to F/A-18 squadrons, to keep ceremony, said “it will be a source of inspiration and pride for all.” them current on carrier operations. The French have also helped out, by offering slots on their warships, and in their carrier fighter squadrons. Meanwhile, there’s always In the two years since AIN last reported on the Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carriers, simulation. BAE Systems provided a briefing at the Farnborough airshow this week on the cost has risen a further £754 million, but the government has reached a cost- the simulator that it has developed, to determine exactly how the F-35 will operate from sharing agreement with the Aircraft Carrier Alliance (ACA) that is building them. The the carrier. ACA comprises BAE Systems, Babcock Marine, Thales and the MoD. That agreement Six Degrees of Freedom In his briefing at the UK’s DSEi event last year, Harding made reference to the unusual formed a small test and evaluation unit at Edwards AFB in 2006. Britain bought four QE-class flight deck design, with ship operation conducted from a forward “island,” and F-35s from early production batches for operational test and evaluation. flight operations from an “aft” island. Harding admitted that this was “a compromise… The British contribution continues with development for the F-35B of the shipboard but I’m not as worried as some about the separation,” he said. Some have noted that the rolling vertical landing (SRVL) technique that was successfully employed by the twin islands are more survivable, if the ship should be attacked. Harding further noted that the flight deck design is very flexible. For instance, there’s a ski ramp to launch the Harrier. This increases the permissible landing weight: vertically landing F-35Bs will not be able to “bring back” to the carrier, a full (unexpended) external weapons load, F-35s, but also an angled deck from which UAVs or UCAVs might be launched in the future. especially in high temperature or low pressure conditions. SRVL boosts the ;anding weight by 4,000 pounds. BAE Systems F-35 test pilot Pete Wilson told AIN last week The first British F-35B squadron—the famous No 617 “Dambusters”—will form in the that SRVL flight trials will take place on the QEII in 2018. In the meantime, “robust” U.S. at Beaufort MCAS in 2016 and work up there. It will move to RAF Marham in April simulation of the technique has been achieved. But there is still some risk attached 2018 and embark on the Queen Elizabeth shortly thereafter. But it will be another two “since the F-35B is designed to stop and land, rather than vice versa,” he said. The U.S. years before the jets will be operational on the ship. They will be ready for land-based Marine Corps might adopt the technique for landing F-35Bs onboard the U.S. Navy’s operations by late 2018, however. Compared to the RAF’s Tornado strike aircraft that large aircraft carriers. (The assault ships that will routinely carry USMC F-35Bs are too they will replace, the F-35s will offer stealth and vastly improved sensors and sensor small for SRVL). fusion. Whether the F-35 is a true multirole aircraft with superior air-to-air maneuverability and capability remains a matter of considerable debate. Speaking more generally about landing the F-35B, Wilson noted how easy it is, compared with the Harriers that he previously flew. They had separate levers to control What is beyond question is that the B version has struggled with weight issues, the throttle and the nozzle angle. “Pilots sometimes grabbed the wrong lever. In the sacrifices range and payload for STOVL capability and costs more to acquire and F-35B, we’ve designed out such cognitive failures,” Wilson explained. “The F-35B holds operate. For this reason, the MoD is studying a mixed fleet of F-35As and F-35Bs, a zero groundspeed, height and lateral [roll] angle very precisely. The pilot makes only a senior RAF officer told AIN, on condition of anonymity. It seems that the mandarins in single-axis input. There’s nothing to do!” he added. the ministry don’t want to admit this, after the previous flip-flop that saw the UK switch from the F-35B to the conventional carrier-landing F-35C version in 2010, and back But even if the F-35B eventually shows up at Farnborough, spectators will not see it again in 2012. The combat radius of an F-35B on a hi-hi-hi mission is only 450 nm, land or take off vertically. The downward-directed thrust is too great and too hot for versus 590 nm for the F-35C. ordinary concrete, let alone tarmac. Special landing pads made from what Wilson calls “ueber-concrete” are being constructed at F-35B airbases. Alternatively, heavy-duty Of course, the British have made an essential contribution to the development of the AM2 metal matting can be used; the Marine Corps insists that this is transportable F-35B. The shaft-driven lift fan (SDLF) is Rolls-Royce technology, and Harrier jump-jet enough for it to retain the forward operating base concept of operations that it has operational heritage has informed much of the planning for the F-35B’s entry into employed with the AV-8B Harrier. Carrier landings and takeoffs by the F-35B are from service on both sides of the Atlantic. The UK had representatives in the program office metal decks that have been specially coated. from the outset; sent a test pilot and 10 engineers to NAS Patuxent River in 2004, and Harriers only carry out RVLs Rolling Vertical Landings on long runways as required - never on carrier decks - they are not suitable nor safe there. MV-22B OSPREY SHORT TAKEOFF AND MINIMUM RUN-ON LANDING TESTS could result in an order of magnitude difference in intended vertical launch to be the method for taking ABOARD LHD CLASS SHIPS l takeoff distance. From this simulator study, a TCL off from the ship. However, there was an interest in Virginia T. Mitchell William P. Geyer application rate of 4 inches in 3 seconds and nacelle the STO technique because it was safer due to the [email protected] V-22 Ship Suitability Engineer [email protected] angle of 70 deg was chosen. The nacelle angle was aircraft spending less time in the single engine Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division chosen because it provided a good compromise inoperative height-velocity avoid region. Thus, during Patuxent River, Maryland between altitude and airspeed gain after takeoff. the second sea trials in August 1999, the V-22 Multi- www.f-16.net/forum/ ABSTRACT download/file.php?id=17415 service Operational Test Team (MOTT) requested an During the first EMD sea trials aboard USS envelope be developed to investigate the benefits of This paper describes recent ship suitability tests conducted by the V-22 Test Team in March 2008 aboard USS SAIPAN (LHA 2) in 1999, STOs were planned and the STO technique. Shipboard STO testing was IWO JIMA (LHD 7). This testing encompassed expanding the Short Takeoff (STO) envelopes and developing a tested for the aircraft launching from the AV-8 TRAM conducted up to 47,300 lb and supplemented with new landing technique termed Minimum Run-on Landing (MROL) to extend V-22 shipboard capability beyond line, shown in Figure 2. Conducting STOs from the landbased testing to expand the GW envelope to Vertical Takeoff and Landing (VTOL) gross weights (GW). The objectives included: initial development of the TRAM line was determined to be unacceptable for 50,000 lb. This limited day envelope is shown in MROL technique in the shipboard environment; expansion of STO and MROL GW envelopes to 58,000 lb (lb), fleet operations because the forward parking area of Figure 3. 10% above the maximum VTOL GW; development of day and night vision goggle STO and MROL wind envelopes to 45 kt headwind and up to 10 kt crosswind; and gathering sufficient data to support analytical tool V-22 validation including but not limited to Short Takeoff and Landing Computation (STOLCOMP) software, STO developed by the Boeing Company, and Generic Tiltrotor software in order to grant day and night vision goggle Line STO envelopes beyond tested ambient conditions. A total of 3.6 flight hours were flown resulting in eleven STOs and eleven MROLs being conducted. A limited data set was collected due to insufficient time at-sea Longitudinal during this period of shipboard testing. Further testing is planned in order to continue to develop MROL wind Lineup Line and GW envelopes, to expand the current day and night vision goggle STO wind and GW envelope, and to gather additional data in support of STOLCOMP model validation. Although limited data was collected, the V-22 successfully demonstrated shipboard STOs at heavy GWs above VTOL capability aboard LHD 1 class Forward ships. The V-22 also demonstrated that MROLs are a new and safe technique for landing on LHD 1 class ships Parking at an appreciable ground speed across the spectrum of GWs bands. Area NOTATION AV-8 During the Engineering and Manufacturing TRAM Development (EMD) phase of the V-22 program in Ratio of test day density to standard Line the late 1990’s, landbased STO nacelle angles had day density been established at 60 deg and 75 deg. An extensive Spot Landing spot designation Forward simulation effort was conducted to determine the on flight deck End of optimal nacelle angle for the shipboard STO. Pilots Island WOD Relative Wind Over Deck, defined in Figure 3 noted that takeoff distance was heavily influenced by direction in azimuth (0 deg is down LHD Class Ship LHA Class Ship Short Takeoff Wind Limits pilot technique. Changes in TCL application rate the bow) and speed in kt Figure 2 for LHD/LHA Class Ships INTRODUCTION Deck Layout for STO Since 1999, the majority of V-22 shipboard the ship had to be cleared in order to provide sufficient testing has been focused on vertical launch and The tilting-rotor configuration of the V-22 lends clearance for the V-22 proprotors. Prior to the second recovery envelope development and expansion. In itself to the unique capability of rolling takeoffs in a shipboard test aboard USS SAIPAN in 1999, a new November 2004, the day STO envelope was evaluated short distance termed “Short Takeoff,” enabling the V-22 STO line was developed that provided sufficient for night vision goggle operations. No issues were V-22 to takeoff at GWs above maximum vertical clearance of the left mainmount with the deck edge found and the day envelope was approved for night takeoff GWs which is limited to 52,600 lb at sea level. and proprotor tips with aircraft in the forward parking vision goggle operations. Modifications to the flight Figure 1 shows a STO being conducted aboard a ship. area. Similarly on LHD class ships, the longitudinal control laws enabled interim power (109% mast A STO is conducted by tilting the nacelles forward lineup line of the port side spots was used because it torque available) available down to 70 deg nacelle. A between 15 and 30 deg, releasing the brakes, and provided greater clearance of the left mainmount to nacelle angle of 71 deg was chosen to ensure interim applying full power between 3 and 6 seconds. The the deck edge than the longitudinal lineup line of the power was enabled during a shipboard STO. longitudinal cyclic is adjusted to keep the main port spots on LHA class ships. Additional analysis using landbased data was landing gear from lifting off before the nose landing conducted to expand the envelope to include calm gear. At liftoff, a pitch attitude is captured to establish Figure 1 The Operational Requirements Document winds, as shown in Figure 4. the desired climb out profile. V-22 conducting STO from the ship required shipboard STOs to be conducted up to 57,000 lb in a 15 kt headwind and liftoff within 300 feet. As V-22 aircraft begin deploying on LHD class Presented at the American Helicopter Society 65th http://www.vtol.org/f65_best This requirement was an Air Force Special Operations ships, V-22 squadrons continue to show interest in the Annual Forum,Grapevine, TX, May 27-29, 2009. Command requirement to support the self deployment capability to conduct shipboard STOs that at a This is a work of the U.S. Government and is not Papers/testAndEvaluation.pdf mission. Although it is not specifically stated in any minimum meet the vertical launch capability in GW. subject to copyright protection in the U.S. document, it is believed that the Marine Corps speed of less than 20 kt on touchdown and be fully TEST EQUIPMENT stopped in a minimal amount of distance on the flight Ship: USS IWO JIMA (LHD 7) deck. Figure 5 shows a MROL being conducted aboard a ship. USS IWO JIMA belonged to the USS WASP 1 FWD (LHD 1) class and was the follow-on design to the Spot 2 LHA 1 class. This class of amphibious assault ships was 844 feet long, 140 feet wide, had a 26 feet draft, and displaced approximately 40,500 tons fully loaded. Two Combustion Engineering boilers, driving two 3 Westinghouse geared turbine engines, produced nearly 114’8” 70,000 shaft horse power installed, and propelled each Spot 4 LHD 1 class ship via twin screws to speeds in excess of 22 kt. The flight deck was 819 feet long and 118 feet wide running the length of the ship, approximately 60 feet above the ship's waterline. 114’5” Aircraft were lowered to and raised from the hangar Spot 5 deck via two elevators, one located on the starboard side Figure 5 aft of the island, and the other located port amidships. V-22 conducting MROL to stern of the ship The flight deck had nine landing spots with three to starboard and six to port and night vision device This paper will provide an overview of test 114’4” compatible lighting. A picture of the ship and the Spot 6 equipment, test planning and execution, post-test flight deck planform and are provided in Figure 6 and analysis, and test results for the shipboard STO and Figure 7. Figure 4 MROL tests aboard USS IWO JIMA in March 2008. ISLAND Expanded Short Takeoff Wind Limits for LHD/LHA Class Ships TEST OVERVIEW The necessity for landing shipboard at GWs V-22 ship suitability testing was conducted 167’8” above maximum vertical landing GWs was desired by aboard USS IWO JIMA from 4-11 March 2008. The the V-22 test team to increase testing efficiency during scope of planned STO tests consisted of GW Spot 7 STO tests. Without this ability, the aircraft would expansion up to 58,000 lb (10% above the maximum 8 have to burn fuel or dump water ballast to reduce GW VTOL GW), headwind expansion from 0 to 45 kt, in order to conduct a vertical landing, wasting crosswind expansion up to +/- 10 kt, and night vision precious shipboard test time. In June 2005, the No- goggle envelope expansion. The scope of planned Hover Landing (NHL) technique was introduced to MROL tests was the same as planned STO tests with 126’2” recover the aircraft to the ship after performing STOs the addition of touchdown predictability. Touchdown Spot 9 near maximum vertical takeoff GWs for present day predictability tests were required prior to conducting conditions. The NHL technique involved using a pre- other MROL tests to determine the pilot’s ability to touchdown flare to arrest forward airspeed while touchdown within the defined touchdown zone and Figure 6 adjusting TCL to maintain glideslope and descent rate. determine touchdown speeds for safely stopping USS WASP (LHD 1) The flare was timed so that forward airspeed was within the braking zone. A total of 3 flights and 3.6 Figure 7 minimized at the point of touchdown. Power was flight hours were flown during the day. Tests Aircraft: MV-22B Osprey required just before touchdown to help arrest descent USS WASP (LHD 1) Flight Deck Planform completed included MROL touchdown predictability The MV-22B Osprey, built by Bell Helicopter rate; however, it was less than what would be required shaft-horsepower and employed Full Authority Digital and STO/MROL GW expansion to 52,000 lb, with Textron and Boeing Integrated Defense Systems, to stabilize in a hover prior to landing. Although Engine Control (FADEC) technology. The nacelle, partial expansion to 54,000 lb. The limited Rotorcraft System, was a tiltrotor aircraft. The pilots liked this technique due to the low workload in located at each end of the wing, housed an engine, a STO/MROL test productivity was attributed to the advantage of a tiltrotor design was that the flight the lateral axis, the NHL technique would have proprotor gearbox, and a tilt axis gearbox. The sharing of shipboard test time with other ship envelope encompassed the envelopes of the helicopter limited utility to test above maximum vertical landing nacelles were designed to rotate about the wing from 0 suitability test priorities, weather delays, and and turboprop airplane. The aircraft design consisted GWs due to lack of excess power to arrest descent rate to 95 deg relative to the aircraft longitudinal axis in unscheduled maintenance. of a fuselage with a high wing and twin vertical on landing. This testing revealed that the aircraft order for the proprotors to provide thrust in airplane stabilizers. The fuselage was designed to seat two would have to land with some appreciable ground mode and lift in helicopter mode. In the event of a pilots, two crewmembers, and 24 troops. Twin three- speed similar to recovery of fixed wing aircraft on single engine failure, the proprotors were bladed proprotors were located at each end of the aircraft carriers, however, without assistance from interconnected via the tilt axis gearbox and the wing and were 38.08 feet in diameter. The proprotors ship arresting gear. Neither this class of ship nor the interconnecting drive shaft located in the wing, were mounted on a gimbaled hub, and powered by V-22 is outfitted with the equipment necessary for enabling the transfer of power from the operating two Rolls Royce Corporation AE1107C turboshaft arrested landings. The MROL technique was Figure 9 engine to the opposite proprotor. The pilots controlled MV-22B in Flight Ready Mode engines. Each engine was capable of producing 6150 therefore developed to allow an appreciable ground the aircraft via a “fly-by-wire” flight control system. V-22 Shipboard Operations • Mandated by Operational Requirements Document (ORD) – Operate from air capable ships without reconfiguration or modification. http:// www. – Embark and operate 24-30 aircraft from an LHA or LHD class ship. g2mil. – Stow below deck on LHA, LHD, and CVN class ships. com/ – Launch/recover in conditions of up to +3 deg ship pitch, +8 deg ship roll. TRAAC – Sustain winds of up to 60 kts without damage when folded/stowed/tied. _Ship – Engage/disengage proprotors in speeds up to 45 kts from any direction. board_ OPS.pdf – Blade fold/wing stow in winds up to 45 kts from any direction. • Shipboard Ops Requirement Drove Rotor Radius 12’8” clearance at landing spot abeam island 5’0” clearance between landing gear and coaming Basic Flow Structures, USN Amphibious Assault Ships Reverse and Separated Turbulent Gusts Separating Flow at Bow from Unsteady Bow Flow Turbulent Wake Flow Behind Island “Necklace” Vortex Around Base of Island http://www.g2mil. com/TRAAC_ Shipboard _OPS.pdf “Necklace” Vortex Around Base of Ship (Generally below deck edge and very weak) Ship aerodynamic environment is very complex; large gradients in local speed and direction, which vary with relative wind speed and direction “Wingtip” Vortex (and presence of other aircraft). (Inboard of deck edge spots, at rotor height) MV-22B OSPREY SHORT TAKEOFF DQGQLJKWYLVLRQJRJJOH672ZLQGDQG*: PD[LPXPYHUWLFDOODQGLQJ*:VGXHWRODFN AND MINIMUM RUN-ON LANDING HQYHORSHDQGWRJDWKHUDGGLWLRQDOGDWDLQ RIH[FHVVSRZHUWRDUUHVWGHVFHQWUDWHRQ TESTS ABOARD LHD CLASS SHIPS VXSSRUWRI672/&203PRGHOYDOLGDWLRQ$O- ODQGLQJ7KLVWHVWLQJUHYHDOHGWKDWWKHDLU- though limited data was collected, the V-22 FUDIWZRXOGKDYHWRODQGZLWKVRPHDSSUH- by Virginia T. Mitchell & William P. Geyer 2008 VXFFHVVIXOO\GHPRQVWUDWHGVKLSERDUG672V FLDEOHJURXQGVSHHGVLPLODUWRUHFRYHU\RI “ABSTRACT DWKHDY\*:VDERYH972/FDSDELOLW\DERDUG ¿[HGZLQJDLUFUDIWRQDLUFUDIWFDUULHUVKRZ- This paper describes recent ship suitabili- LHD 1 class ships. The V-22 also demonstrat- HYHUZLWKRXWDVVLVWDQFHIURPVKLSDUUHVWLQJ ty tests conducted by the V-22 Test Team HGWKDW052/VDUHDQHZDQGVDIHWHFKQLTXH JHDU1HLWKHUWKLVFODVVRIVKLSQRUWKH9 in March 2008 aboard USS IWO JIMA (LHD IRUODQGLQJRQ/+'FODVVVKLSVDWDQDSSUH- LVRXW¿WWHGZLWKWKHHTXLSPHQWQHFHVVDU\ 7). This testing encompassed expanding the FLDEOHJURXQGVSHHGDFURVVWKHVSHFWUXPRI IRUDUUHVWHGODQGLQJV7KH052/WHFKQLTXH 6KRUW7DNHRϑ 672 HQYHORSHVDQGGHYHORS- GWs bands.... ZDVWKHUHIRUHGHYHORSHGWRDOORZDQDSSUH- ing a new landing technique termed Minimum 7KHQHFHVVLW\IRUODQGLQJVKLSERDUGDW FLDEOHJURXQGVSHHGRIOHVVWKDQNWRQ Run-on Landing (MROL) to extend V-22 ship- *:V>*URVV:HLJKWV@DERYHPD[LPXPYHU- WRXFKGRZQDQGEHIXOO\VWRSSHGLQDPLQLPDO ERDUGFDSDELOLW\EH\RQG9HUWLFDO7DNHRϑDQG tical landing GWs was desired by the V-22 DPRXQWRIGLVWDQFHRQWKHÀLJKWGHFN Landing (VTOL) gross weights (GW). The ob- WHVWWHDPWRLQFUHDVHWHVWLQJHϒFLHQF\GXU- ...TEST OVERVIEW MHFWLYHVLQFOXGHG LQLWLDOGHYHORSPHQWRIWKH LQJ672>6KRUW7DNH2ϑ@WHVWV:LWKRXWWKLV V-22 ship suitability testing was conducted 052/WHFKQLTXHLQWKHVKLSERDUGHQYLURQ- DELOLW\WKHDLUFUDIWZRXOGKDYHWREXUQIXHO DERDUG866,:2-,0$IURP0DUFK PHQW H[SDQVLRQRI672DQG052/*:HQYH- or dump water ballast to reduce GW in order 7KHVFRSHRISODQQHG672WHVWVFRQVLVWHGRI ORSHVWROE OE DERYHWKHPD[- WRFRQGXFWDYHUWLFDOODQGLQJZDVWLQJSUH- *:H[SDQVLRQXSWROE DERYH LPXP972/*: GHYHORSPHQWRIGD\DQG cious shipboard test time. In June 2005, the the maximum VTOL GW), headwind expan- QLJKWYLVLRQJRJJOH672DQG052/ZLQGHQ- 1R+RYHU/DQGLQJ 1+/ WHFKQLTXHZDVLQWUR- VLRQIURPWRNWFURVVZLQGH[SDQVLRQXS YHORSHVWRNWKHDGZLQGDQGXSWRNW GXFHGWRUHFRYHUWKHDLUFUDIWWRWKHVKLSDIWHU WRNWDQGQLJKWYLVLRQJRJJOHHQYHORSH FURVVZLQG DQGJDWKHULQJVXϒFLHQWGDWDWR SHUIRUPLQJ672VQHDUPD[LPXPYHUWLFDO H[SDQVLRQ7KHVFRSHRISODQQHG052/WHVWV VXSSRUWDQDO\WLFDOWRROYDOLGDWLRQLQFOXGLQJ WDNHRϑ*:VIRUSUHVHQWGD\FRQGLWLRQV7KH was the same as planned STO tests with the EXWQRWOLPLWHGWR6KRUW7DNHRϑDQG/DQG- 1+/WHFKQLTXHLQYROYHGXVLQJDSUHWRXFK- DGGLWLRQRIWRXFKGRZQSUHGLFWDELOLW\7RXFK- LQJ&RPSXWDWLRQ 672/&203 VRIWZDUHGH- GRZQÀDUHWRDUUHVWIRUZDUGDLUVSHHGZKLOH down predictability tests were required prior YHORSHGE\WKH%RHLQJ&RPSDQ\DQG*H- adjusting TCL to maintain glideslope and de- to conducting other MROL tests to determine QHULF7LOWURWRUVRIWZDUHLQRUGHUWRJUDQWGD\ scent rate. the pilot’s ability to touchdown within the de- DQGQLJKWYLVLRQJRJJOH672HQYHORSHVEH- 7KHÀDUHZDVWLPHGVRWKDWIRUZDUGDLU- ¿QHGWRXFKGRZQ]RQHDQGGHWHUPLQHWRXFK- \RQGWHVWHGDPELHQWFRQGLWLRQV$WRWDORI VSHHGZDVPLQLPL]HGDWWKHSRLQWRIWRXFK- GRZQVSHHGVIRUVDIHO\VWRSSLQJZLWKLQWKH ÀLJKWKRXUVZHUHÀRZQUHVXOWLQJLQHOHY- GRZQ3RZHUZDVUHTXLUHGMXVWEHIRUHWRXFK- EUDNLQJ]RQH$WRWDORIÀLJKWVDQGÀLJKW HQ672VDQGHOHYHQ052/VEHLQJFRQGXFWHG GRZQWRKHOSDUUHVWGHVFHQWUDWH KRZHYHULW KRXUVZHUHÀRZQGXULQJWKHGD\7HVWVFRP- $OLPLWHGGDWDVHWZDVFROOHFWHGGXHWRLQVXI- was less than what would be required to sta- pleted included MROL touchdown predictabili- ¿FLHQWWLPHDWVHDGXULQJWKLVSHULRGRIVKLS- ELOL]HLQDKRYHUSULRUWRODQGLQJ$OWKRXJK ty and STO/MROL GW expansion to 52,000 lb, board testing. Further testing is planned in pilots liked this technique due to the low ZLWKSDUWLDOH[SDQVLRQWROE´ RUGHUWRFRQWLQXHWRGHYHORS052/ZLQGDQG workload in the lateral axis, the NHL tech- QLTXHZRXOGKDYHOLPLWHGXWLOLW\WRWHVWDERYH *:HQYHORSHVWRH[SDQGWKHFXUUHQWGD\ www.vtol.org/f65_bestPapers/testAndEvaluation.pdf V-22 Testing Could Lead WDNHRϑZHLJKWRIOE 'RQDOGVRQSURGXFHGEDUULHU¿OWHU 7R+LJKHU7DNHRϑ:HLJKWV The current maximum vertical ZDVSURFHHGLQJZLWKWKHQH[W WDNHRϑZHLJKWLVOE PDMRUPLOHVWRQHLQWHVWLQJGXHWR 12 Nov 2015 Tony Osborne The aim is to make Osprey’s WDNHSODFHLQWKHVXPPHURI “DUBAI – Naval Air Systems maximum gross weight also ZLWKZLQGWXQQHOWHVWV7KH,,6LV Command (NAVAIR) has been WKHUROOLQJPD[LPXPWDNHRϑ GHVLJQHGUHSODFHWKHHQJLQHDLU working to widen the V-22 ZHLJKWLQGXVWU\RϒFLDOVWROG SDUWLFOHVHSDUDWRU ($36 FXUUHQWO\ 2VSUH\¶VÀLJKWHQYHORSHE\WHVWLQJ $YLDWLRQ:HHN XVHGWRNHHSPDWHULDOIURP rolling landing [MROL] and “This was done as a target HQWHULQJWKHHQJLQH WDNHRϑVZKLFKFRXOGSDYHWKHZD\ RIRSSRUWXQLW\´5RELQVRQWROG %XWWKH,,6LVFXUUHQWO\RQO\ IRUKLJKHUWDNHRϑZHLJKWV UHSRUWHUV³7KHVDPHKDQGOLQJ IXQGHGE\WKH$LU)RUFHIRU¿WPHQW 6SHDNLQJDWWKH'XEDL$LUVKRZ TXDOLWLHVFDQEHXVHGRQWKH onto its CV-22s and not the Marine RQ1RY&RO'DQ5RELQVRQ9 MarineDPSKLELRXVDVVDXOWships´ &RUSV09V5RELQVRQVDLGWKLV SURJUDPPDQDJHUVDLGWKHWHVWV Development of the Navy’s ZDVEHFDXVHWKH86$)FRQGXFWHG ZRXOGEHDSSOLFDEOHWRWKH2VSUH\¶V &2'92'FDSDELOLW\LVGXHWR PRUHUHJXODUUHVWULFWHGYLVLELOLW\ XVHDVWKH1DY\¶VIXWXUHcarrier/ EHJLQLQ¿VFDOZLWK¿UVW landing (RVL) operations and vertical onboard delivery GHOLYHULHVH[SHFWHGLQ¿VFDO needed the IIS to improve engine (COD/VOD) platform as well as DQGDQLQLWLDORSHUDWLQJFDSDELOLW\ WLPHRQZLQJ7KLVLVLQVSLWHRI amphibious assault ships. WREHDFKLHYHGLQ¿VFDO7KH GRFXPHQWVVHHQE\$YLDWLRQ:HHN The tests were carried out DLUFUDIWZLOOGLϑHUVOLJKWO\IURP ZKLFKVWDWHWKDWUHDFWLYHPLQHUDOV on one of the Navy’s aircraft 0DULQH&RUSV09VIHDWXULQJ managed to enter the engine of an carriers in October, and DQLQFUHDVHGVL]HODQGLQJJHDU 09ZKLFKFUDVKHGGXULQJ59/ saw the Osprey perform 69 VSRQVRQDOORZLQJWKH¿WPHQWRID RSHUDWLRQVDW%HOORZV)LHOG+DZDLL minimum roll-on landings using ODUJHUIXHOWDQN$EH\RQGOLQHRI LQ0D\ the angled deck for the landing VLJKWFRPPXQLFDWLRQVV\VWHPZLOO 5RELQVRQVDLGQRGHFLVLRQZRXOG DQGWDNHRϑUXQV&UHZVDOVR DOVREH¿WWHG EHPDGHXQWLOWKH¿QDOUHSRUWRQ SHUIRUPHGWDNHRϑVDW Robinson also revealed that WKH%HOORZV)LHOGDFFLGHQWKDG the MV-22’s maximum gross development of the Improved Inlet EHHQSXEOLVKHG%XWLIWKHUHSRUW weight of 60,500 lb., some 6ROXWLRQ ,,6 D¿OWUDWLRQV\VWHP UHFRPPHQGHG¿WPHQWRIWKH,,6 3,500 lb. over the Osprey’s for the air intake on the Osprey’s WKHQLWZRXOGEHFRQVLGHUHG´ current maximum rolling 5ROOV5R\FH$(&XVLQJD http://aviationweek.com/defense/v-22- WHVWLQJFRXOGOHDGKLJKHUWDNHRϑZHLJKWV