Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by CoolHand on Wednesday June 03 2015, @06:57PM   Printer-friendly
from the cool-new-toys dept.

Aviation Week reports:

As senior Pentagon editor, there are perks to being a scribe. May 26, I had the opportunity to witness aviation history with a small group of reporters invited to the USS Wasp amphibious ship to witness a few hours of the first-ever F-35B Operational Test (OT-1) trials off the coast of North Carolina. I'm posting some of the many videos I collected to give our readers a sense of what we saw on the boat.

During OT-1, actual Marines -- not test overseers -- are operating the six F-35Bs that embarked May 18 for the tests; this includes pilots and maintainers. During DT (developmental testing), we got to see firsthand the first vertical landing and short takeoff at sea, but in OT-1, the Marines are demonstrating a cadence to operations to gain confidence the single-engine, stealthy fighters can assimilate into an air wing onboard the amphibious ship, which will include other platforms: the MV-22, CH-53E/K, AH-W/Z and unmanned air systems among them. This is all leading up to the operational debut of the F-35B, slated in July.

The article contains an 8 minute video of the F-35B with an accompanying written overview of what is occurring at various points during the video.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by JeanCroix on Thursday June 04 2015, @01:12AM

    by JeanCroix (573) on Thursday June 04 2015, @01:12AM (#191856)

    The decision to procure a multi-role aircraft was not mine, obviously, but one derived from the military and congress, in due respect. The companies I was and am employed by were/are contracted to fulfill that requirement, to the best of our ability and for the lowest cost. Personally, I may not professionally agree with such broad requirements, but no amount of feedback or pushback from me or my peers will be enough to sway what the military thinks it needs. So we strive to provide the best we can.

    In terms of modern air warfare doctrine, its unfair to consider any one aircraft a "direct successor" to the F-16, F-15, or even A-10. Roles are constantly changing - some expanding, others diminishing. Some roles are creating themselves where none existed before - Predators and Avengers, for instance.

    As a final note here, don't forget that unless you have a clearance and are in the industry, you really only have a partial view of the iceberg that is modern air warfare. No offense intended, but your opinions can only be based on what's publicly acknowledged, and not the full range of knowledge and technology we're working with. Watch the History channel in 20 years and it might tell you then what we were developing now.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2, Touché) by FunkyLich on Thursday June 04 2015, @03:35PM

    by FunkyLich (4689) on Thursday June 04 2015, @03:35PM (#192116)

    Does the same principle of "your opinions can only be based on what's publicly acknowledged, and not the full range of knowledge and technology we're working with" hold true if we replace the variable "F-35B" with "Su-35S" or "PAK FA T-50" ?