Well, as Ron Popeil says, "but wait, there's more/"
It is now likely that the exhaust will be hot enough so that the aircraft will be unable to operate from austere fields in STOVL mode, and by, "Austere," we mean, "just about any non-military airfield in the world," as well as a lot of the military ones:
But a Navy report issued in January says that the F-35B, in fact, won't be able to use such forward bases. Indeed, unless it ditches its short take-off, vertical landing capability and touches down like a conventional fighter, it won't be able to use land bases at all without some major construction efforts.What's more, if you make an appropriate landing area, it has to be in one slab, without joints, because there are current no existing sealers that can take the heat, and if the aircraft is waiting for clearance with its APU (the Integrated Power Pack or IPP) running, that can burn holes in the runway too.
The newly released document, hosted on a government building-design resource site, outlines what base-construction engineers need to do to ensure that the F-35B's exhaust does not turn the surface it lands on into an area-denial weapon. And it's not trivial. Vertical-landing "pads will be exposed to 1700 deg. F and high velocity (Mach 1) exhaust," the report says. The exhaust will melt asphalt and "is likely to spall the surface of standard airfield concrete pavements on the first VL." (The report leaves to the imagination what jagged chunks of spalled concrete will do in a supersonic blast field.)
Bill Sweetman is correct when he notes, "Worst case or not, there is a very big difference between a solid slab of high-grade concrete and the kind of surface you are apt to find anywhere ending in -stan."
And then there is cost, where the JSF unit cost is up 50% from its 2002 number, shattering the Nunn-McCurdy barrier, and that is assuming that the purchase numbers remain the same, something is about as likely as Obama pursuing war crimes prosecutions against Dick Cheney.
No comments:
Post a Comment