An anonymous forum to allow you to share those moments in flying that caused you concern. You can post without registering a username, registered users can log out to post
User avatar
By Merlin83b
#1615048
cotterpot wrote:The secondary runway is 6,086 feet long. It’s three new vertical landing pads are 1,200 feet long.


A vertical landing that needs 1200ft? Here's hoping they don't have to operate off a carrier anytime soon :lol:
User avatar
By Dave W
#1619028
Merlin83b wrote:
cotterpot wrote:The secondary runway is 6,086 feet long. It’s three new vertical landing pads are 1,200 feet long.


A vertical landing that needs 1200ft? Here's hoping they don't have to operate off a carrier anytime soon :lol:


UK engineers and pilots have developed (initially using the VAAC Harrier) a very successful technique for the F-35B known as "SRVL", designed for carrier-borne operations and which has attracted significant interest from the US Marine Corps operators.

SRVL stands for "Shipborne Rolling Vertical Landing" and has the operational advantage that it can increase the recovery payload of the aircraft, compared with wholly jetborne flight in a vertical landing. The technique also extends the operational life of the engine and lift fan as well as reducing the impact on the lifeing of the flight deck surface.

Apologies for bringing facts into the discussion; I know how unfashionable those are in any discussion of the F-35 or Queen Elizabeth Class.