Note that F135 STOVL Up-and-Away flights already occurred earlier this year, as did Pit Evaluation Testing of the Engine & Lift Fan. The F35 A/C has now been flight quaified for Powered Lift and the First Vertical Landing is scheduled in the next few weeks. CTOL/CV Initial Service Release (ISR) or Production Engines are also scheduled to be completed before year-end. BTW, we are talking about an extraordinarily robust and efficient F119 core here that combined with the control is overachieving on virtrually all requirements…

In addition, comments from JPO indicate remarkable ability to dial in steady-state thrust and that idle to max-thrust is much quicker and consistent than the F119, F110 or F100. The other comments are that the F135 has achieved level 1 powered-lift flying quality as compared to the Harrier ADOUR’s level 5 capability. This is the “balance” of simultaenously achieving thrust, thrust split (and roll control). This is where PW has a significant advantage over the F136 in an open competition. There is 10 years of learned experience here, that GE/RR has virtually no experience with.

well i just hadn’t seen the story about how it finally passed stovl testing. if you could like to that, it would be appreciated

> The F136 is a larger core, bigger fuel waster with advanced materials that are not ready for prime-time

well if it’s as bad as you say, then i’m sure the F135 has nothing to fear from it in an open competition

> The F135 uses the proved, smaller F119 core that is as robust as they come. This equates to delivering required thrust, more efficiently.

i can see more effiency possibly, but i don’t see how using a smaller core equals more thrust

A paper engine is one that can’t make it through its first serious max testing. The engine has spent nearly most of this year not being tested. 8 hours on, months off, 8 hours on, monthos more off. The F136 is a larger core, bigger fuel waster with advanced materials that are not ready for prime-time. The F135 uses the proved, smaller F119 core that is as robust as they come. This equates to delivering required thrust, more efficiently.

you’re not looking
http://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/10/07/dings-and-nicks...

> Can imagine the hullabaloo if that was the F135.

you mean like this?
http://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/09/18/pratts-f135-nee...

> Here we have a paper engine F136 competing against an F135 that has already achieved flight qualification for all variants

1. Misleading at best. STOVL mode (the most difficult) has NOT been qualified
2. which is worse: a failure at the beginning of a program or after it’s ‘achieved flight qualification for all variants’?

> but who cares if we have health care… as long as we keep flowing money to the unproven F136 and the GE lobby

you cannot be serious

keeping the alternate engine for another year is $560 million

that’s such a small amount i’m not sure why it’s even an issue

in comparison, the US spent over $2.2 TRILLION on healthcare in 2007

($560 million is $0.00056 trillion)

Considering how the Obama administration wants to cut our carrier fleet including possibility retiring one of the Nimitz class carriers decades early, we can’t rely solely on naval aviation.

41,100 lbs (F135 demonstrated hover thrust) — 29,695 lbs (OEW of F-35B) = 11,405 lbs
That is a GREATER hover thrust vs weight margin then the AV-8B! Meaning that the F-35B can be expected to take-off/hover/land with GREATER PAYLOAD than the AV-8B.

Pilots who have ALREADY flown the F-35 are quite impressed with the power of the F135. No way you can claim an aircraft that a Block 50 F-16 needs to periodically light the afterburner in order to keep up with is underpowered. For F-35 pilots “flying the engine” will mean NOT using the afterburner as much…