F-35b stovl

Superfly7XAF

Well-Known Member
Is STOVL really necessary? I've been reading about the F-35 and wondering if it's really necessary to have a Marine Corps variant that is STOVL capable. I'm ignorant on how the Corps flies their aircraft so maybe someone can clue me in if the capability is really used in a combat environment. The only advantage I can see is for landing on Carriers but they're already building a Carrier variant for the Navy. It seems like something nice to have but really only a novelty act used at air shows and makes me question if it's worth the money to develop a -B model; though I'm sure it makes the aircraft attractive for export and it's really all about money anyway.
 
Is STOVL really necessary? I've been reading about the F-35 and wondering if it's really necessary to have a Marine Corps variant that is STOVL capable. I'm ignorant on how the Corps flies their aircraft so maybe someone can clue me in if the capability is really used in a combat environment. The only advantage I can see is for landing on Carriers but they're already building a Carrier variant for the Navy. It seems like something nice to have but really only a novelty act used at air shows and makes me question if it's worth the money to develop a -B model; though I'm sure it makes the aircraft attractive for export and it's really all about money anyway.

There are certain scenarios where that capability could be needed, especially in the types of operations that the USMC performs. To date, they haven't had to use it in anger as specifically planned, as the Harriers in Desert Storm and the current wars are operated mostly out of fixed bases or at times off of amphibious carriers.

The pros to having VSTOL capability is offset by the cons of not being able to carry much of a payload when doing so. So it depends.
 
+1, USMC jets operate heavily off big deck amphibs which conventional carrier-based fixed wing aircraft can't use. Their Hornets on the other hand are primarily forward deployed at land bases, with a very small minority of their F/A-18C's aboard conventional aircraft carriers. While there has been some talk about Marines eventually getting a small number of F-35C's for carrier use, I'm guessing that they are more interested in maintaining their amphib and expeditionary presence than they are in mixing with USN carrier air-wings. Notably, the Harrier was designed to operate in combat from unimproved landing strips/roads/clearings, so I'd guess that they would value this capability in a replacement aircraft as well (thus STOVL).
 
Ask the Brits...small deck carriers or amphibs....smaller ship, can come back and land vertically. Works out pretty good from what I hear.
 
Is STOVL really necessary? I've been reading about the F-35 and wondering if it's really necessary to have a Marine Corps variant that is STOVL capable. I'm ignorant on how the Corps flies their aircraft so maybe someone can clue me in if the capability is really used in a combat environment. The only advantage I can see is for landing on Carriers but they're already building a Carrier variant for the Navy. It seems like something nice to have but really only a novelty act used at air shows and makes me question if it's worth the money to develop a -B model; though I'm sure it makes the aircraft attractive for export and it's really all about money anyway.

While I can't speak to the total R/D costs associated with the -B model compared to the -C model, isn't the STOVL version less expensive per ship to build than the carrier variant? I've definitely read that in past years but curious to know if that is still the case.
 
Hi!

I believe the RAF is also getting this plane, and all the have is the STOL/VTOL carriers...no large US-type carriers.

cliff
NBO
 
Hi!

I believe the RAF is also getting this plane, and all the have is the STOL/VTOL carriers...no large US-type carriers.

cliff
NBO

With the retirement of the HMS Ark Royal in 1978, all RN carriers have been VTOL carriers.
 
The Your-Rope-Eans are gonna buy the F35 now matter what it turns out to be because they've been a part of building so much of it, VSTOVL or not.

The thing was meant to be sold.
 
Back
Top