Still STOVL - they were going to put in EM CATs but that would have meant interrupting the build programme on boat 2 and retro-fitting boat 1 so deemed too expensive. STOVL probably not good due to reduced range and payload.

"Defence capability" is similar doublespeak to what we use in German, but in case of an aircraft carrier, it really is just irritating to speak of defence.

Anyways, what's the latest on these puppies? STOVL or CATOBAR? I haven't read a thing about it in years, ever since the F-35 went horribly over budget for the umpteenth time.

CATOBAR and F-35C was the last I heard, but that was quite some time ago.

I've been trying to make that out, but am still confused. Maybe someone who has better info can chime in.
I think the VTOL capability of the F35B is very much inferior to that of the harrier, in that the F35B will only be able to use VTOL to move the plane short distances under a reduced fuel load... I'm guessing without any armament?
It should be able to execute short take off and vertical landing (STOVL) in battle ready condition.

The Harrier could also be used for vertical takeoff if required (VTOL), which I believe is not possible with the F35 (STOVL)?

>> ^Jinx:

The Harrier is to the F35 as the Sopwith Camel is to the Eurofighter.
Ok, thats hyperbole, but the Harrier was pretty limited. I wasn't supersonic for a start, no stealth capabilities, fairly limited air to air/manoeuverability etc. No gun for ground attack either.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'F35b, jet, vertical landing, lockheed martin' to 'F35b, jet, vertical landing, lockheed martin, stovl, jump jet, duct fan' - edited by calvados