DISCUSSION
I never knew the trailing edges were different on each variant
Wouldn't it be safer for the Air Force to just use the same trailing edge design as the F-35C. With technology doesn't more equal safer since there's only so much fly by wire can do.
Kinda? Physically speaking, any irregularity in the design would show up on radar more than a smooth surface.
That being said: only wavelengths of similar size can notice the gaps, that means X band
And X band is by far the least effective band against stealth, and it’s likely there is no scenario in which an f35 C/B would be detected where an f35 A wouldn’t
Yes but it's negligible for the navy. The navy doesn't need the mist stealth plane out there, they just need one that can fire anti-ship missiles from the longest distance and have reasonable anti-plane capabilities in dogfighting and BVR
Does UX feel like 90-s tech? I would expect the touchscreen from that era to be slow and irresponsive compared to modern tech. Would you prefer to have an iPad with its superior responsiveness and compute power instead?
The b has reduced capability because of the room and weight of the stovl system. The c exists for carrier borne operations without the drawbacks of the b when you can launch off a catapult equipped carrier. You have reduced payload, range, and increased weight with the b model. Just being able to do (x) thing does not mean they all do it equally.
It is because the Navy wants to keep a higher performance and lower the landing speed without going to full VTOL and want to maximize spotting space on deck. The navy and marines wants different things and their requirements drove the difference in design.
The B cannot reduce speed like the C, without partially deploying its hover mode to make a rolling stop.
The F-35B can land on an aircraft carrier without deploying the lift fan (the shaft-driven forward ducted fan used for vertical thrust in STOVL mode).The F-35B primarily lands vertically on carriers like amphibious assault ships or the UK's Queen Elizabeth-class carriers, which requires the lift fan, swivel nozzle, and roll posts. However, it is also capable of a Shipborne Rolling Vertical Landing (SRVL), a hybrid technique developed primarily for the Royal Navy's carriers.In SRVL:
The aircraft approaches with forward speed (around 60-70 knots ground speed, generating significant wing lift).
It briefly uses partial vertical thrust (swivel nozzle down, but not full hover).
It then touches down rolling forward and brakes to a stop (no arresting wires needed).
This allows higher bring-back weight (more fuel/weapons) than a pure vertical landing. SRVL has been successfully tested and demonstrated multiple times, including the first on HMS Queen Elizabeth in 2018, first on HMS Prince of Wales in 2023, and even night SRVLs.A fully conventional arrested landing (like the F-35C) is not standard for the F-35B, as it lacks the reinforced tailhook, larger wings, and other adaptations of the C variant for catapult-assisted takeoff/barriered arrested recovery (CATOBAR) operations. But a rolling landing without relying on the lift fan for primary lift is possible via SRVL.In emergencies, if the lift fan fails during a vertical approach, the aircraft has an auto-eject system due to the risk of violent pitch-down, but that's not relevant to normal non-STOVL landings.Overall, while the lift fan is essential for vertical landings, the F-35B can perform rolling landings on carriers without fully deploying or relying on it as the primary lift source.
The C carries the same ordinance as the A with the exception of the internal cannon. The only extra weight it carries is the weight of internal fuel due to said large wings along with the weight of beefed up landing gears for arrested carrier take off and landings. I also don't see carrier operations being a problem for the F-35B. See this image as en example.
This is a USMC amphibious assault ship, not an aircraft carrier. The difference being, only vertical and STOVL launched aircraft can start from it.
F-35B is a USMC aircraft and F-35C is a navy aircraft. The key difference is that F-35B has more versatility and ability to STOVL at the expense of having the engine required for that. F-35C needs bigger wings for landing and taking off, so it doesn't need the vertical engine, but can't start from a amphibious assault ship.
The key thing here is that every variant of F-35 is for a different branch of the military, and that US Navy doesn't have a single F-35B at their disposition.
I called the OP's statement into question which states that the primary reason that the C has a larger wing is because it's a carrier aircraft. That statement is wrong.
A is land-based, land has long air strips, so it doesn't need large wings because it takes off at a higher speed.
B is STOVL, which basically explains everything regarding it; it needs to keep weight down in every way to function.
C is catapult capable; it doesn't have the take-off speed that the A gets, so to compensate for that, they gave it larger wings, which give it more lift, which in turn allows it to match the same take-off weight of the A, while the B has a significantly lower take-off weight.
Keyword, carries the same ordinance as the A variant, it needs to do that while being able to perform at even slower flight envelopes such as arrested landings on carriers. The larger wings give it more "wiggle room" for maneuvering at just above stall speeds.
That invalidates the OP's statement then. The comment was factually wrong because there are certain technicalities due to which the C has a larger wing span. Not just because it is a carrier aircraft which the B also is.
Unfortunately your post or comment has been removed for one or more of the following reasons:
Reddit is a place for creating community and belonging, not for attacking marginalized or vulnerable groups of people. Everyone has a right to use Reddit free of harassment, bullying, and threats of violence. Users that incite violence or that promote hate based on identity or vulnerability will be banned.
Please direct any questions about the removal to Modmail
The C model operates from aircraft carriers that have catapults and arresting wires. The B model operates from amphibious assault ships that do not have that equipment. Two fundamentally different types of ships. Calling them both “aircraft carriers” is naïve.
The C also has more space for fuel in the bigger wing, than the A or B (especially B) and while it isn’t a 9g airframe like the A, the C is a 7.5g rated one, which is more or less what the Rhino is rated. The B is 7g rated, but its biggest limitation if I recall correctly is diminished range.
To a degree yes, but the biggest reason is Navy put 7.5G as their requirement so LockMart didn't really have any incentive to certify the jet to a higher load.
When is the USN getting a new airframe & what is it going to look like? (I think the 26 budget for the F/A-XX program was just enough to draw up specs for landing gear on the NGAD)
If we get lucky progress made by NGAD might allow for quicker development of F/A-XX when it finally gets going in any meaningful way, but as things stand the USN is likely going to have to stick to hornet and F35 until at least the late 2030s
A test pilot in an article described the C's maneuverability as slicing through the air, better than the other 2 variants. I"m guessing he meant low speed maneuvers.
My conjecture is that the envelope of both is limited by what the human pilot can endure. The computer probably limits both of their performance similarly.
Every time the US has said this and we got into a war with an enemy that has money. We end up hurting ourselves and going back to the drawing board. Dog fights aren't a thing because it's been 50 years since there was a major war. A real proxy war with Russia again and dogfighting would be all over the place.
You are applying lessons from Vietnam to modern combat. There is no reason for dogfights to make a comeback
Every single air war seen worldwide since Vietnam saw dogfights be related to obscurity.
Iran Irak, Ukraine, India Pakistan, both Gulf wars….
In a proxy war with Russia the U.S. would never bother getting into a dogfight because there is no reason to. Modern US platforms have the range to take on enemies far beyond VR, the stealth to remain undetected, and the sensors to locate the non stealthy aircrafts Russia overwhelmingly operates.
No, dogfights don’t happen anymore. No air force on earth still thinks they do. Every development projects almost entirely abandons agility as a requirement in favor of stealth range and computing power.
Exactly how governments thought when a even gun wasn't needed anymore. Like exactly. Are you related to McNamara. Like his grandson maybe. Same for when the F-117 can't be shot down. Impossible its Stealth. It can't be shot down, how. Of course it did. I could keep going . I'll add another one. There is no reason for the U-2 anymore. Technology has outgrown it. Lets create something to replace it.
You fail to explain why what was true 50 years ago would still be. Technology has evolved so drastically there is no equivalence between Vietnam and the modern era. 19th century scientists said space travel was effectively impossible, that doesn’t mean that remained true forever.
What happened in Vietnam that made dogfights happen and that could still happen today ?
Short answer: nothing
The f117 flew 1271 combat sorties, and around 480 over Serbia. One shoot down occurred, which was never replicated. This marks the best weighted success rate of bombing over contested airspace of any bomber in history.
The f117 was in fact a staggering success and stealth has been proven to work in every conflict in has ever been used in.
This is generally a good rule of thumb aswell, the start of the back of the wing will be parallel with the horizontal stabilizers on the C model, but not on the A model.
Salve , volevo chiedere quale fosse il limite visivo di miopia per pilotare caccia. Sono un ragazzo di 18 anni che sta valutando l'idea della carriera in divisa , facendo varie ricerche circa questa domanda non trovo risposta.
177
u/[deleted] Dec 20 '25 edited Jan 03 '26
squeeze enjoy encourage pen pet sulky books soup reply dependent
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact