Britain's Rolls-Royce LiftSystem ready for F-35B world-wide deployment.

[Blue Marlin]

I never knew that. Got any link to back that up bro?

heres a link i got, theres plenty more online
F-35B: Born in the USSR | Russia & India Report

 

[bobo6661]

Not a very good sorce

Russia Beyond The Headlines (RBTH) is a multilingual news and information resource that offers news, comment, opinion and analysis on culture, politics, business, science, and public life in Russia. The resource is sponsored by the Rossiyskaya Gazeta, the Russian government’s official newspaper

 

[mike2000 is back]

heres a link i got, theres plenty more online
F-35B: Born in the USSR | Russia & India Report

Good read. I did read before that Lockheed martin did cooperate with Russia on the YAK 141, but never knew it also inspired them to design/build the F-35. But not sure about the Russian source though. lol Will make some more research of my own.
Thanks for the link though.

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

video
http://brightcove.vo.llnwd.net/e1/u...12112001_141583-JSF-short-MP4-HDbroadcast.mp4

another video

 

[mike2000 is back]

we should have gone solo too. also during develoipment of the eft and when france was in the consortium, france insisted the jet be air to ground specific, jet whislt the rest of the consortuim wanted an air superiority jet. this was one of the main reasons for france leaving. during that time money was not a problem. after the cold-war then defence budgets were slashed then thats when order numbers were cut. and germany wanted to cut the number of planes yet have the same stake which we didnt like, and then it all graged on from there.
now i guess you want to want to join us in cooperation of the ucav. tbh i prefer going solo. spliting the cost with other countries may be cost effective but it comes with risks, similar to that of when the typhoon was in development. im sure we are not that niaeve to let too much of the development go abroad.

after further looking into the joint cooperation i found this:
BAE and Dassault are eight months into a two-year government-funded study on the feasibility of a joint Future Combat Air System, or FCAS. The initial stage has been deliberately limited to the UK and France, for fear that more partner countries will add complexity and just push up costs, as happened with the seven-nation A400M military transport aircraft built by Airbus.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d9209910-33b5-11e5-bdbb-35e55cbae175.html

I agree, as much as i like the idea of European powers cooperating with each other, i will rather we go solo on this one or at most cooperate ONLY with France. Adding in more partners will only lead to more issues/delays and increase costs like in the case of A400M military aircraft you mentioned.

So its either we go solo, since we have already done almost all of the hard work already with our world class Taranis, or at the very most we cooperate just with France. This way this project will be operational/built faster.

 

[Blue Marlin]

I agree, as much as i like the idea of European powers cooperating with each other, i will rather we go solo on this one or at most cooperate ONLY with France. Adding in more partners will only lead to more issues/delays and increase costs like in the case of A400M military aircraft you mentioned.

So its either we go solo, since we have already done almost all of the hard work already with our world class Taranis, or at the very most we cooperate just with France. This way this project will be operational/built faster.

i agree all of what you said but the last sentance i disagree with. france may want differant requirements,but if they want it to the same spec as us then its a noe brainer and will sail ahead. as @Taygibay said together we have produced some cutting edge stuff.

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

heres a link i got, theres plenty more online
F-35B: Born in the USSR | Russia & India Report

There were no fans in the yak 141. It was all vectored thrust just like the harrier. The only similarity with the F35 is the rear engine swiveled down.

Yak 38. 3 jet engines. 2 dedicated small ones in the front.

Yak 141

3 jet engines...two small ones in the front...no fans

 

[Blue Marlin]

There were no fans in the yak 141. It was all vectored thrust just like the harrier. The only similarity with the F35 is the rear engine swiveled down.

look at the cutaway. the only thing the yak141 does not have that the f35 has is the stabalising thrusts on the the wings. other than that theres near enough the same thing

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

look at the cutaway. the only thing the yak141 does not have that the f35 has is the stabalising thrusts on the the wings. other than that theres near enough the same thing

Show me the fan blades

The F35 has a big fan connected to the main engine by an axle. There's only one engine driving everything.

 

[VCheng]

There were no fans in the yak 141. It was all vectored thrust just like the harrier. The only similarity with the F35 is the rear engine swiveled down.

There are other basic errors in that link, such as saying the Sea Harrier had two engines, but leaving all those aside, the whole premise of this thread is to promote the idea that the Lada was a "better" and earlier car than the Corolla, so the Russians get to claim the Corolla's success.

 

[mike2000 is back]

as @Taygibay said together we have produced some cutting edge stuff.

True bro. On another note:

Business Secretary opens £30m extension to world-class engine production facility in Derby, UK

Monday, 23 November 2015

Rolls-Royce today marked the official opening of its £30m Production Facility extension to its Derby Assembly & Test Facility with a ceremony conducted by Business Secretary Sajid Javid. The 2867m2 extension will increase capacity to assemble Trent civil aero engines and become the production hub for the Trent XWB, the world's most efficient large aero engine and the fastest-selling widebody engine in history.

Rolls-Royce has installed new equipment and is making use of advanced manufacturing processes helping to boost productivity in order to meet customer demand. Over the next two to three years, Trent XWB production will grow to more than 300 engines a year – the equivalent of one every working day. The engine is expected to be in service for many years, creating an annuity of aftermarket services that will generate revenues for decades to come.

Business Secretary Sajid Javid said: “The opening is great news for the company, its workforce, and the UK. Aerospace is a great British success story. I want to capitalise on our world-leading capability so that we can win a big share of the £3.5 trillion market for new aircraft which will be needed over the next 20 years.”

Rolls-Royce Chief Executive Warren East said: “It was a great pleasure to welcome the Business Secretary to open our new Production Facility extension. We are transforming our global industrial base and investing in innovative technology to help us deliver our record £76.5 billion order book. Our world-class Assembly & Test Facility in Derby will deliver a wide range of Trent civil aero engines including the Trent XWB. The Trent XWB engine is fundamental to the future growth of Rolls-Royce.”

The production of Trent XWB engines is the culmination of a decade of hard work byRolls-Royce employees, partners and suppliers around the world. The new extension also includes a new employee canteen and over 1600m2 of office space.

Some facts about the Trent XWB:

• Each Trent XWB is made up of more than 39,000 parts
• The fan case of the Trent XWB, at just under 10ft in diameter, is wider than the fuselage of Concorde
• The fan blades at the front suck in up to 1.3 tonnes of air (more than a squash court) every second at take-off
• The force on a fan blade at take-off is equivalent to a load of almost 90 tons, the same as nine London buses hanging off each blade
• More than 1500 orders from 41 customers in 30 countries

Download high resolution images from

About Rolls-Royce Holdings plc

1. Rolls-Royce’s vision is to create better power for a changing world via two main business divisions, Aerospace and Land & Sea. These business divisions address markets with two strong technology platforms, gas turbines and reciprocating engines. Aerospace comprises Civil Aerospace and Defence Aerospace. Land & Sea comprises Marine, Nuclear and Power Systems.
2. Rolls-Royce has customers in more than 120 countries, comprising more than 380 airlines and leasing customers, 160 armed forces, 4,000 marine customers including 70 navies, and more than 5,000 power and nuclear customers.
3. Our business is focused on the 4Cs:
   • Customer – placing the customer at the heart of our business
   • Concentration – deciding where to grow and where not to
   • Cost – continually looking to increase efficiency
   • Cash – improving financial performance.
4. Annual underlying revenue was £14.6 billion in 2014, around half of which came from the provision of aftermarket services. The firm and announced order book stood at £76.5 billion at 30 June 2015.
5. In 2014, Rolls-Royce invested £1.2 billion on research and development. We also support a global network of 31 University Technology Centres, which position Rolls-Royce engineers at the forefront of scientific research.
6. Rolls-Royce employs over 54,000 people in more than 50 countries. Over 15,500 of these are engineers.
7. The Group has a strong commitment to apprentice and graduate recruitment and to further developing employee skills. In 2014 we employed 354 graduates and 357 apprentices through our worldwide training programmes. Globally we have over 1,000 Rolls-Royce STEM ambassadors who are actively involved in education programmes and activities; we have set ourselves a target to reach 6 million people through our STEM outreach activities by 2020

Business Secretary opens £30m extension to world-class engine production facility in Derby, UK – Rolls-Royce

Cutting edge tech indeed Our engineers are world class and second to none..

There are other basic errors in that link, such as saying the Sea Harrier had two engines, but leaving all those aside, the whole premise of this thread is to promote the idea that the Lada was a "better" and earlier car than the Corolla, so the Russians get to claim the Corolla's success.

ahahahaha...........true talk.

 

[Blue Marlin]

Show me the fan blades

from the images below everything but the roll nozzels came from the yak-141.
note it was not the tech as it was very old but it was a modernised version

 

[bobo6661]

Hope thet didnt "copy" to much ;p

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

from the images below everything but the roll nozzels came from the yak-141.
note it was not the tech as it was very old but it was a modernised version

Hmm, yes, the roll nozzle design on the wings bleeding from the main engine does look exactly like the Yak 141 design. Although the Harrier too does bleed from the sides of the main engine.

 

[Taygibay]

And we all forgot to answer @Jai Bharat 's query!

Essentially, the decision to go for the B came through the conflation of politics and logistics.
If one looks at military affairs in big democracies, this is a rather regular occurrence simply
because the timelines of both domains are different in aims and goals.

If the material concerned is in existence already, decisions are no more difficult to make than
usual ( sic ) for the politicos. If however we are talking of a future program, all hell breaks loose.

If the program is to be decided, opinions abound as few are qualified and debate rages as it
would for any ideological difference. National preference hurts a lot too if it's international.
Once the program is decided upon, it shifts to local interests with each MP fighting to get the
main plant for his circumscription or at least for the material to be deployed there.
Then the accountants get in the fray with MPs translating tax calculations into fairy tales since
they usually understand nothing about basic maths and likely wouldn't care if they did anyhow.
And as time drags on, the discussions get muddled by changes in government and shifting economy.

Meanwhile, the armed forces do a bit of the same. A consideration for a future weapon is usually
pretty basic : that the thing works well, i.e. kills enemies and saves your own soldiers' lives.
But high brass with more time than dirt on their hands begin day-dreaming : why couldn't a tank
do CAS, it only needs to fly in order to do so after all? They often disregard troop level opinions
about simplifying equipment but ensuring quality, functionality and maintenance. Their requirement
sheets end up looking like a Christmas wish list by young kids ( not very bright ones, at that ) : no care of cost!

And of course, that far away from induction, neither of them is held back by the toy making elves
AKA competing manufacturers who'll promise literally anything to be selected.
- A Cappuccino machine in a fast jet cockpit? Sure! Do you want one on the missiles too?

The more time the above have to ponder, wonder & wander, the less realistic completion becomes!
Then slowly, very slowly, reality creeps in :

The program may not fit in the budget that year.
Heck, having ballooned into pharaonic proportions, it may not fit in any budget ever!
Besides, the economy took a plunge.
And no, dear MP, we can't have a high grade explosive manufacturing plant in Soho, sorry!

How about forgetting CAS and just getting a new tank …
before the ones we have in service serve both on the battlefield & in museums.
( That's concurrency for you, huh? )

Jets envisioned to make that tank do CAS are behind development schedule.
And the Cappuccino cup fitting for the oxygen mask is more tricky than envisioned.
And parliament is balking at additional funds required for the adjustments.
​

At which point, the MPs ( by then the sons of those that started the whole thing ) get drastic.
Keep the revolutionary CAS capacity and just forget that tank's ability to fight on the ground!
Buy less, when not forget the whole thing altogether ( think Nimrod MRA4 d/evolution ).

The brass answers by accepting the reduced numbers even though they won't allow for all
units to be equipped, blaming the troops for the upcoming logistical nightmare of multiple high
maintenance small series and cooking up a surrealistic tactics book to compensate.

The selected maker swears that every thing can still be fixed, provided the money envelope is
multiplied by 2,000 ( Inflation, you know? ) and induction slightly pushed back ( Say 50 years! ).

At which point …

- the politicos decide any which way in a hurry blaming the result on their predecessors;
- the high brass defends its position as a strategic error by recently retired generals ... ;
- the maker runs an ad campaign to make it clear that they're still number one worldwide.​

Let it be noted that if the tank won't fly, programs costs however go stratospheric with ease.
​

One of the many poor options left available is selected : politicos usually opting to cut troops
since there won't be that many units of the material to be manned which makes sense ,
the brass eschews blame by re-instating the lone guy that got fired a few years back for noticing
out loud that there is no pilot in a missile to drink from that Cappuccino machine so that they can
court-martial him and the manufacturer starts dissing fully working competing products.

If you then take my very generic overlook above and apply it to the F-35 UK buy, you find that :
building the QE class carriers dragged on along the lines of yes/ no/ maybe with slowing of the
decisional process for possible cooperation, which also raised costs, until the change back to
Catobar was discovered to be, if not impossible, at least impractical cash-wise at which point the
"powerless that maybe" decided to miss-equip the legendary RAF to save pennies on logistics!
Completely oblivious to the fact that the whole mess was of their own doing, I may add!

Considering how it might infuriate the average British tax-payer and how those people are too proper
and well-mannered to cry in public ( the logical result to this whole mess ), you turn to world famous
humour and get this brilliant piece :

In fact, to close somewhat more on topic, London should send Nelson's column to Washington so it
may be erected smack in the middle of the Pentagon as a thankful reminder that … with the help of
Lock-Mart, the incredibly late FOC of the Lightning II may be used as an excuse for the parliament
members to cover their sorry azzes!

The only assuaging thing in that being that most modern programs fail along the same lines
and that, thank Shiva, things could be worst as looking at an ex-colony in Asia will confirm!

Sarcasm out, Tay.

​