See the Marine F-35B Stealth Fighter’s First Vertical Carrier Landing
- Posted on October 4, 2011 at 4:53pm by
Buck Sexton
- Print »
- Email »
The United States Marine Corps is test driving its new stealth fighter– and this one can even land vertically.
The Blaze brings you the F-35B fifth generation stealth fighter. It’s the only short-takeoff, vertical landing (STOVL) variant of the aerial platforms developed in the Joint Strike Fighter program. And it looks pretty incredible.
Stealth planes are generally known for their ability to evade radar, engage other craft first, and unleash munitions deep behind enemy lines, but the F-35B adds an advanced close air support element (CAS) to the Marine Corps’ arsenal.
The F-35B would give Marine expeditionary forces a complete air superiority tool whenever a beachhead is established. It could take-off and land from the smaller amphibious vessels used by the Marine Corps, as well as from makeshift or unfinished airfields.
Check out this just video released of its first vertical landing on the deck of the USS Wasp, conducted Monday:
Historically speaking, the Marine Corps has focused on rugged, low-tech warfare. Marine acquisitions have revolved around the nuts-and-bolts of expeditionary warfare, not the hyper-advanced technologies associated with the Air Force and Navy. 
That history of low-cost, high-output from the Corps may tie into fears that the F-35B could end up on the Pentagon’s budget chopping block. The program was placed on probation by then Defense Secretary Gates last year because of its delays and massive budget overruns.
Regardless of the F-35B’s future, it seems the Marines could use a versatile, fifth generation aerial combat element to replace the aging AV-B Harrier aircraft. If not the F-35, some analysts have suggested the unlikely step of giving the Marines control over some of the even more advanced F-22 Raptors held by the Air Force.
AV-B Harrier
If the Marines are going to continue to be Washington’s service-of-choice for rapid deployments to hotspots around the world, they must be given whatever tools they need to get the job doe.
Popular Stories
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 584 Comments
‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 413 Comments
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 412 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 374 Comments
President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 368 Comments
Faith
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 412 Comments
Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 413 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
- President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 368 Comments
- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 151 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 302 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 412 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (82)
neke
Posted on October 4, 2011 at 8:28pmHow long before the Bamster and his cronies leak the technology to our enemies. You know it’s not fair that we have a more advanced military than everyone else! We must give everyone a level playing field.
Report Post »getalong
Posted on October 4, 2011 at 8:39pmI was just thinking the same thing. Unfortunately they probably already have. Let’s hope that there are still military personnel who see the insanity of this president and his administration and take measures to withhold our secrets. God, I love American technology!!!!! Exceptionalism at its best.
Report Post »joongoon
Posted on October 4, 2011 at 9:02pmso i want to be in the USAF but what i don’t seem to understand why every branch of the military has a jet or there own helicopter, The US army has the AH-1Z viper and the AH-1Y Venom as there main helicopters. i understand the NAVY because they have aircraft carriers but i don’t see why we just cant have the USAF handle all the jets. its making it hard to make a decisions because it seems every branch has there own form of a Air Force.
just to let everyone know i think they are already in the process of upgrading the old F-22 Raptors. i wish they would hurry up this aircraft because China and Russia are catching up fast in Air superiority
i have one last thing, i was reading earlier about china, it said that at the rate they use oil they wont be able to keep using oil for much longer. they are using it up so fast it could cause a economic downfall. can anyone give a verification on this because as much as i hate to say it, it sounds like good news haha.
Report Post »warhorse_03826
Posted on October 5, 2011 at 3:37amjoongoon,
different branches of the military have their own requirements. and building a do-all-be-all aircraft is expensive..so you will not be able to afford many of them, and it will not do those jobs well. there are some aircraft that are present in many branches in modified forms..the H-60 and C-130 are examples of that.
please understand that if you do join the military, you will not have the option of what aircraft you would like to work on. you will go where they tell you to go and work in the squadron they want you to. so use the other requirements for service to decide which branch to join.
the US army no longer uses the AH-1, they were all retired in the 1990′s. the Marines still use them because they can be stored on helicopter carriers..the US army uses the AH-64 Apache.
we don’t let the USAF handle “all the jets” because they don’t train to land on carriers or have aircraft capable of that, and don’t train for close-air support like the marines (although they SHOULD in both respects. it would be a force multiplier)
the F-22 are not in the process of being upgraded. it would be nice if they took the F-15′s and upgraded them to “stealth eagle” standard, but there is no money for it.
expect that if china runs out of oil they will get it by any means. japan did the same thing during their misadventures in the late 1930‘s and it didn’t end well for them..but no one ever accused the communist chinese of learning from others mistakes.
I
Report Post »joseph mitch nixon
Posted on October 5, 2011 at 3:45amthe production line is going on to be in china , just like GE did with their aerospace division . we are a nation of idiots .
Report Post »old white guy
Posted on October 5, 2011 at 7:15amthat pilot is very good. it must take some talent to move the plane forward and land vertically at the same time.
Report Post »BEAGREATFATHER
Posted on October 5, 2011 at 7:24amYou may have posted this as a joke, but the truth is that this is the FIRST plane that the U.S. has “partners” – all of which they are already sharing the technology. I just toured the manufacturing facility at Lockheed Martin in Fort Worth and there were nine different country’s flags displayed prominently. I asked why and was shocked at the answer. The “partner countries”: the UK, Italy, the Netherlands, Turkey, Canada, Australia, Norway, Denmark, Israel and Singapore. Most of them, I’m sort of okay with, but has anyone noticed what’s happening in Turkey lately???
Report Post »DanWesson455
Posted on October 5, 2011 at 8:33amI’ll keep on paying. USMC, whatever it takes for your mission. Bless you guys. Now go GET THEM!!!
Report Post »garybkatz
Posted on October 5, 2011 at 1:59pmMaybe, but do you honestly think those chowder heads would have a single pilot good enough to take off or land one of these F35s? They may be trained enough to fly one into a skyscraper, but any plane will do that.
Report Post »Dismayed Veteran
Posted on October 5, 2011 at 3:23pmA short lesson.
The US Navy carrier-based battle fleet projects US power and commands the world’s seas. (See Battle of Midway, Battle of Coral Sea, Yankee Station, Desert Shield, Desert Storm, current wars etc.). This projection of power requires aircraft that fit certain missions EX: bombers, fighters, fuel, recon.
A USMC Battalion Landing Force is part of each battle fleet (to my Marine brothers: sorry I don’t know the correct designation. I am Army.). The USMC needs fixed wing and rotory aircraft to protect the fleet and provide close air protection the the Marine Landing Force.
The USAF is provides extended long range projection of power. This is bombers, fighters, fuel, recon, etc.
The Army’s role is large scale military operations. This means lots of troops with rotary aircraft to tank bust and provide close air support. The USAF, USN and USMC jets provide heavy close air support of ground troops.
To all the pilots and aviators, there is no sweeter sound than a fast mover.
In a nut shell that is why we have aircraft in all of the military branches.
To every vet, if I made this a goat rope posting, don’t tell me.
Report Post »teamarcheson
Posted on October 5, 2011 at 9:05pmThe law of physics cannot be eliminated. If this fighter cannot now be detected on existing radars, it will be detected one day. There has to be some combination of radio frequencies or modulated combination that will detect this or any other stealth aircraft.
Report Post »Dean Lester
Posted on October 6, 2011 at 12:44pmThe Department of the Navy should manage the programs for all aircraft 200,000 pounds gross weight and below. The Navy has more strenuous requirements than the Air Force.
The Navy should be responsible for training all pilots and aircrew for aircraft 200,000 pounds gross weight below.
The training should include carrier operations. All Air Force tactical pilots should be able to take off and land on our carriers. (Force Multiplier)
The Navy should control operating procedures and produce all manuals for aircraft 200,000 pounds gross weight and below.
The Air Force should manage all aspects of aircraft 200,001 pounds gross weight and above.
Examples:
The C-130 is operated by the Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard. They are all configured differently, operated differently, and have completely different maintenance procedures.
The maintenance and aircrew personnel are trained in multiple locations using different procedures.
The Navy has 20 C-130T tankers that have never been used for inflight refueling. At the very same time the Air Force is begging Congress for funding to buy Tankers!
The military is the most wasteful organization I have ever seen.
Report Post »The-Monk
Posted on October 4, 2011 at 8:19pmHave you seen the first take-off of the F-35 on an Aircraft Carrier?
Report Post »http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNtU0aRu7Co
deano24
Posted on October 4, 2011 at 9:51pmThat video is from the video game BF2. Anybody probably could do that if they wanted.
Report Post »James
Posted on October 4, 2011 at 8:14pmThat’s one pretty war bird.
ESQ
Report Post »cymbalmonkey
Posted on October 4, 2011 at 8:11pmAwwwwwww yeah!!!
Report Post »Fly Old Glory 24/7 365
Posted on October 4, 2011 at 8:16pmsomebeach, one mean looking machine….Got to be impressed with our military and the ppl that design and put this stuff together….
Report Post »dawghowse
Posted on October 4, 2011 at 8:05pmWant one gotta have one!
Report Post »Tear Em Up
Posted on October 4, 2011 at 7:59pmThey can design, and build, a VTOL stealth fighter, COOL! Now, if only they can get my teenager off the couch…..
http://traffic.libsyn.com/mikeleeandterrymartin/Number_83_Oct._2nd_2011.mp3
Report Post »its_time_to_arrest_our_government
Posted on October 5, 2011 at 12:35amnow he dont need to get off the couch we got things that cant be maned because a pilot cant take the gs. the sit in new mexico and shoot missiles in africa. join the air force and never leave your living room…. gotta love America! oh and those of you who don’t, leave! this goes for you code pinkos…
Report Post »LastAmerican
Posted on October 5, 2011 at 8:15amYou kidding. Just put your couch in the front seat of one of those and give him an xbox controller and we are good to go. Ha
Report Post »Hickory
Posted on October 4, 2011 at 7:23pmAmerica. We build the best fighters in the world.
Report Post »db321
Posted on October 4, 2011 at 10:52pmNo question we have a strong and brave military force – our Commander and Chief leave a little bit to be desired.
Report Post »V-MAN MACE
Posted on October 4, 2011 at 7:09pmThey have technology that makes this look like a Flintstones episode.
Not impressed.
Show me the Mercury Vortex Magnetic Disruptor -equipped vehicles.
Report Post »HuskerDave
Posted on October 5, 2011 at 10:52amYou really do say some of the most puzzling things.
Report Post »Buck Shane
Posted on October 4, 2011 at 7:03pmThe only problem with this plane is that I will never get to fly one.
Report Post »Supercalafragalisticexpialidotious
Posted on October 4, 2011 at 11:34pmlol! :D
Sigh…my own personal jet fighter to get me places. ^__^ T’would rock.
Report Post »ejbonk
Posted on October 4, 2011 at 6:58pmAfter seeing that do you still want to cut defence research and developmet spending. I sure as hell do n’t. Our Boys on the front lines need the best equipment available.
Report Post »TomFerrari
Posted on October 4, 2011 at 6:55pmSuh-WEEET!!!
MUCH easier to fly, I hear, than the old AV8-A Harriers were. Now, computer assisted control makes it easier than balancing a bowling ball on a matchstick, which is about what it was like, vertically landing the “jump jets.”
Report Post »BOMUSTGO
Posted on October 4, 2011 at 7:08pmRight on! Unlike the Harrier, this plane can go Mach 1, and is stealthy to a degree.
Report Post »NewLife56
Posted on October 4, 2011 at 6:31pmDon’t let Obama see this, he will order these planes to be given to the middle east and cancel any more being made for us.
Report Post »Charles
Posted on October 4, 2011 at 6:30pmHere’s hoping its more controllable than the previous vertical take off and landing jets. The Harriers tend to crash on vertical landings. Often.
Report Post »bankerpapaw
Posted on October 4, 2011 at 6:23pmLook out, Taliban!!
Report Post »Humnbrd
Posted on October 4, 2011 at 6:03pmBadass!
Report Post »TheBeatGoesOn
Posted on October 4, 2011 at 5:51pmYet another difference between The Corps and The Air Force.
Report Post »Just try a carrier landing – of any sort – with a…C-130 or KC 135 or better still a B-52.
Gotta do away with the super structure though. Okay, OK! Put a hook on a F 15 Eagle or a F 16 Falcon and SEA what happens…….bad pun. No, not every pilot would be comfortable landing on a moving deck but no denying the GREAT Value and service of ALL military jockeys who serve and do the hard stuff for the rest of us back here on earth. Wow X 100! And thanks to the men & women who serve this land we call home.
BOMUSTGO
Posted on October 4, 2011 at 7:06pmThe F-15 and F-16 don’t have the beefed up landing gear needed for a landing on a carrier.They do have hooks to catch a barrier at the end of the runway in case of a break failure or something.
Report Post »Dismayed Veteran
Posted on October 4, 2011 at 5:31pmThel United States Marine Corps has always had close air support to ground troops. They are famous for that support.
Report Post »Devil Dog 7175
Posted on October 4, 2011 at 5:31pmOOOOORAH! Get some! Lets see… who wants to be the first to try out the business end of this bad boy?
Report Post »LarryofArabia
Posted on October 4, 2011 at 5:29pmI want one for Christmas. Really, I just want to be home for Christmas.
Report Post »chfields62
Posted on October 4, 2011 at 5:36pmMe too!!!!
Report Post »MadMat62
Posted on October 4, 2011 at 5:10pmThis is hot-off-the-press technology. This aircraft will actually accomplish what the Harrier was intended to do. Great job! Now we just need an enemy to try it out on… Hello Iran!
Report Post »Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
Posted on October 4, 2011 at 5:13pmIndeed, though I imagine it will be put to the torch by the administration.
Report Post »Gary Fishaholic
Posted on October 4, 2011 at 5:09pmYes!
Report Post »skippy6
Posted on October 4, 2011 at 5:08pmMuch easier to land than the Harrier…..
Report Post »right-wing-waco
Posted on October 4, 2011 at 5:06pmI want one… or two!
Report Post »82dAirborne
Posted on October 4, 2011 at 5:11pmGet in line!
Report Post »FLyoverman
Posted on October 4, 2011 at 5:31pm@82DAIRBORNE, Written like a man who jumped from perfectly good airplanes. Hooooah! If I could buy you one I would!
Report Post »Taldren
Posted on October 4, 2011 at 5:05pmThe F-35B needs to replace the Harrier. The Harrier is a very dangerous to pilot in a hovering role, requires far too much training time, and is very long in the tooth. This is so far beyond the F-22 replacing the F-15 in necessity.
Report Post »jimay
Posted on October 4, 2011 at 5:02pmDoes this feature look like it would be usable under heavy seas or combat conditions?
Report Post »Taldren
Posted on October 4, 2011 at 5:08pmDo you consider the ability to “create” a forward operating airbase without the need to construct a runway a feature? You could park these things right next to Apache and Super Cobra attack helicopters in the field.
Report Post »