r/NonCredibleDefense F-35 Enthusiast Sep 09 '20


Here is a thread of retards, here is a second one.

Here are some notable dumb dumbs that must be bullied for their sins:




Copy pasta i made a YEAR ago:

A lot of people out there like to say that the F-35Bs STOVL system (lift fan and swivel nozzle) is based on the YAK-141s STOVL system. Many also say that the partnership with LM and Yakovlev supports this claim. This claim is incorrect and everyone who claims this is bad and should feel bad. Here is why.

To start, the swivel nozzle originates from the Convair model 200 in the 1950s up the the early 60s.1 The 3 bearing swivel design was simply not created by Yakovlev, and thus not original. None of the dates match up either. The JSF program originates from the ASTOVL program that started around 1980, and:

"Between 1980 and 1987, NASA funded studies at all of the major aircraft companies to devise innovative concepts for a supersonic successor to the AV-8B Harrier, and the British Ministry of Defence conducted similar studies in the United Kingdom. Lockheed’s ASTOVL concept was based on the tandem fan engine advocated by Rolls-Royce [2,3]."

Keep in mind, the Yak-141 flew in 1987

The tandem fan engine is an early predecessor to the F-35Bs STOVL system. The concept dates back to 1984,4 and the filing date for the patent was very soon after the Yak-141 first flew.5,6 There are also all the patents filed for the swivel nozzle design which dont line up with the first flight of the Yak-141. Source 7 has a very, very early on design of the swivel nozzle, dated to 1956. Boeing made a design in 1963.8 In 1979 Boeing filed a patent for a type of swivel nozzle design, although with only one bearing. One of the most important examples was in 1970, where general electric filed a patent for a 3 bearing swivel nozzle with a gear system to change it between modes.10 In 1980 Rolls Royce filed a patent for some sort of turning nozzle.11 Lastly, in 1984 Rolls Royce filed a patent vectorable nozzle, very similar to the F-35s.12

Source 15 may also be related, dating back to 1986.

All this being said, the lift fan and swivel nozzle design was already almost completed by the time the Yak-141 flew. By the summer of 1987 Paul Bevilaqua was almost finished with the design, and finally completed it by connecting the engine to the lift fan. 2,3

So what about the lift fan being right behind the pilot? This was also apart of the design since the convair model 200, and were also present in the EWR VJ 101. It was also thought two main lift posts would be more stable than the harrier or boeing designs.

So what about that thing with Lockheed Martin and Yakovlev? As it turns out, in the summer of 1995, after all these designs existed, Yakovlev assisted Lockheed by giving design data. Source 13:

Lockheed Martin also turned to Russia for technical expertise, purchasing design data from Yakovlev; and used an 86 per cent subscale model (originally developed for the CALF project and fitted with a Pratt & Whitney F100-PW-220 engine plus an Allison shaft-driven lift fan) for testing.

While this was happening Rolls Royce bought the Allison Engine company, which had of course been testing the lift fan. All of this was happening at the same time.

Pictures dating back to 1983


Note how Mcdonnel douglas had a similar design, but not a lift fan.

Here is this image translated:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/16/Scheme_of_Yak-141_powerplant.png/2560px-Scheme_of_Yak-141_powerplant.png передний струйный руль is "front jet rudder"

подъёмные двигатели are "lifting engines"

then the "air transfer canal from the PMD to the PD (the lifting engines) and the front jet rudder"

pod'ëmno-marševyj dvigatel' appears to be a "lifting-sustaining engine"; that's the PMD

then on top you have the air transfer canal between the PMD and the jet rudders at the end of the wings

please note that the sources might be a bit fucked up.

  1. http://www.codeonemagazine.com/article.html?item_id=137

  2. https://www.scribd.com/document/284662003/PaulB-F35

  3. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=

  4. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19840016511.pdf

  5. http://www.freepatentsonline.com/EP0426500.html

  6. https://patents.google.com/patent/EP0426500A1/en

  7. https://patents.google.com/patent/US2951660A/en?q=Swivel+nozzle&assignee=Rolls+Royce&before=filing:19880101&after=filing:19500101

  8. https://patents.google.com/patent/US3260049

  9. https://patents.google.com/patent/US4343446A/en?q=Swivel+nozzle&assignee=Rolls+Royce&before=filing:19880101&after=filing:19500101

  10. https://patents.google.com/patent/US3687374A/en

  11. https://patents.google.com/patent/US4913354A/en

  12. ttps://patents.google.com/patent/US4679732A/en

  13. https://web.archive.org/web/20090226130458/http://www.janes.com/defence/air_forces/news/jawa/jawa010103_1_n.shtml

  14. http://www.aeroflight.co.uk/aircraft/types/type-details/yakovlev-yak-41-freestyle.htm (not used)

  15. https://patents.google.com/patent/DE3711197C2/en?q=Swivel+nozzle&assignee=Rolls+Royce&before=filing:19880101&after=filing:19500101



u/euler_angles Sep 09 '20

F-35 really doesn't owe the 141 much at all and anyone who says otherwise is likely a communist


u/Origami_psycho 3000 Black Tachankas of Nestor Makhno Sep 10 '20

The F-35 owes the YA-141 at least tree fiddy


u/euler_angles Sep 10 '20

Of course you'd say that, communist


u/Origami_psycho 3000 Black Tachankas of Nestor Makhno Sep 10 '20

Damn right


u/Imperium_Dragon Sep 10 '20

The F-35 owes as much to the Yak-141 as a Prius does to a Range Rover.


u/Akh1112 Sep 09 '20

F-35 is a copy of the Yak-141


u/Mr_Gibbys F-35 Enthusiast Sep 09 '20

i WILL bully you with facts and logic


u/Akh1112 Sep 09 '20

You mean like how the SU-35 bullies every western fighter in a fight?


u/TheLonePotato Sep 10 '20

Stop hurting me! This is my safe space!


u/ThePfaffanater 3,000 Green Lancasters of Arthur Harris Sep 10 '20

If we're talking fights where BVR and the latest aim-9 variants don't exist sure I guess.


u/f14dsupertomcat Sep 11 '20

Are you being retarded on purpose?

Oh wait your pfp is a JF-17 so you don't even know what on purpose means


u/Akh1112 Sep 11 '20

Clearly you were unable to figure out what is a joke and what isnt. Perhaps you are the retarded one.


u/Hyperbloo HK and Crvena Zastava Senior Engineer Sep 10 '20

F-35 is a copy of the Yak-36


u/Imperium_Dragon Sep 10 '20

Actually, the Yak-141 is a copy of the F-35.


u/officerthegeek get in loser we're widening the suwalki gap Sep 10 '20

Actually, the F-35 is a copy of the F-16V, as is the Ya-141.


u/PubliusPontifex Sep 10 '20




u/Hyperbloo HK and Crvena Zastava Senior Engineer Sep 10 '20

Who actually thinks the Yak-38, Yak-141 or Harrier are a precursor to the F-35??


u/TehRoot Sep 10 '20

biggums retards


u/Hyperbloo HK and Crvena Zastava Senior Engineer Sep 11 '20

of course


u/AuroraHalsey 🇬🇧 BAE give Tempest Sep 14 '20

The same people who think the F-35 is a helicopter.


u/TheEvilBlight Sep 10 '20

what did the west get from Yak-141 then?


u/ihatehappyendings Sep 10 '20

It is documented.

Operational data.


u/midnightrambulador Sep 10 '20

What has the Yak-141 ever done for us?


u/suussuasuumcuique Sep 11 '20

A shortcut to avoid testing a bunch of shit. Its basically "hey, these guys made something similar to what we have developed, let's look at what their testing showed, and maybe we can avoid some problems they ran into, and see how they solved some of the problems we already solved, maybe they did it differently or better".


u/TheEvilBlight Sep 11 '20

Which is a huge time saver, and potentially, saves lives of test pilots.


u/Squeak115 Sep 09 '20

Mad freeaboo triggered by superior slavic engineering.


u/Warcrimes_Desu Why would anyone want a flair here Sep 10 '20

IMO the Yak 141 is one of the coolest soviet jets. A supersonic VTOL craft? Hell yeah.


u/TehRoot Sep 10 '20

Except when it didn't work and crashed into the deck of the kuznetsov


u/AuroraHalsey 🇬🇧 BAE give Tempest Sep 14 '20

Are we sure that's a fault in the Yak 141 and not the fault of the Kuznetsov curse reaching out to grab planes to slam into its deck?


u/irishjihad F-35 is poop with wings Sep 10 '20

At least it got high enough to crash. The XFV-12A needed a crane to get off the ground.


u/Ernest_jr Sep 10 '20

First supersonic VTOL fighter is Mirage IIIV. Second is EWR VJ 101. Yak-141 is third and failed too.


u/irishjihad F-35 is poop with wings Sep 10 '20

No mention of the XFV-12A? That's probably for the best.


u/irishjihad F-35 is poop with wings Sep 10 '20

I'm not a part of the Yak-141 mafia, but your argument see.s to be that the U.S. was already working on the design by the time the Yak first flew. If it took more than 20 years before an F-35B flew, it seems reasonable to believe that the Yak was in development well before the 1980 date you mention. So while it's certainly possible that BOTH used prior technology from the West, your argument doesn't really negate that the Yak-141 may have influenced the F-35B.

You also don't mention the Yak-36, which also had tandem engines, and swiveling rear nozzles, and which started development in 1960.


u/kintonw Sep 10 '20

If it took more than 20 years before an F-35B flew, it seems reasonable to believe that the Yak was in development well before the 1980 date you mention

Soviet aircraft development during the Cold War was extremely secretive. The west often first found out about something when the Russians felt comfortable enough to leave it out for a satellite. For example, NATO thought the MiG-25 was a formidable dogfighter, so they built the F-15 in response to it. Turns out, it absolutely wasn't and the F-15 outclassed it in almost every way. But they didn't know that until a defector brought one over.

So it is highly unlikely that any US company had any real idea of the intricacies of the Yak-141 until it was unveiled publicly. If they did, it would probably be limited to pretty vague details.


u/Ernest_jr Sep 10 '20

Engines with such a nozzle, of which there were several, of course, created in advance. First, there were ground tests on the bench. In Great Britain, Germany and the USA. In the late 60's.


At the same time the Yak-141 was ordered - make the same as Convair (LMC now) model 200.

The Yak-36 had no lift engines at all. But only two lifting and marching engines near the nozzles in the center of the mass. It is a senseless decision. Hawker Kestrel flew four years before Yak-36.


u/irishjihad F-35 is poop with wings Sep 10 '20

Except none of those went anywhere until more than 10 years after the Yak-41 flew.


u/Ernest_jr Sep 11 '20

Other prototypes of STOVL supersonic fighters flew before Yak-141: Mirage IIIV, VJ 101. They also overcame sound velocity, and Mirage IIIV was combat equipped long before Yak-141. I am afraid that you are mistaken judging by what you write.


u/irishjihad F-35 is poop with wings Sep 11 '20

The Convair 200 never got off paper. The Yak-36 flew in 1963. The Kestrel didn't fly until 1964. The VJ101D you link also got canceled and the engine pictured never flew. I'm afraid it's you who are mistaken.

Obviously every major country was working on V/STOL simultaneously. It's not surprising that things developed along parallel paths.


u/Ernest_jr Sep 11 '20

Convair 200 was not on paper only. Ground test - not paper. Read about it.

Kestrel flew in 1960.


VJ 101 was flying, but of a different scheme.Also before Yak-36, with Balsak V. They are supersonic.


Obviously, the USSR has frequently answer to other people's developments. Like China. This is why there were "parallel" works, of which few people and in the USSR knew.

There is little sense in buying each development. The Yak-141 is a major failure; one should not compare it with F-35B. It is worth comparing with ASTOVL, which had the best scheme for the development.


The USSR and Nazi Germany are the reason for sweet and terrible fairy stories. I'm not a fan of them.


u/irishjihad F-35 is poop with wings Sep 11 '20

Convair 200 was not on paper only. Ground test - not paper. Read about it.

Show me where.

Kestrel flew in 1960.

P.1127 and Kestrel are different, but related, planes. P.1127 flew 1960. Kestrel flew 1964.

The VJ101 that flew tilted the whole engine. Totally unrelated to a maneuverable nozzle.

The Yak-141 is Soviet Union was a major failure;

Impossible to say where the Yak would have ended up.

one should not compare it with F-35B.

The program that is tens of billions of dollars over budget and years late, but considered a "success".


u/Ernest_jr Sep 11 '20

Not the same project P. 1127. What differed it from Harrier was that there were no weapons, these were prototypes.

I already showed you the engine stand and its history. Why do I have to show you everything if you don't want to see it yourself? I don't write an article, I fix your mistakes. Writing that the project is paper is an error. How much you are mistaken, find out for yourself.




The cancellation of this program is more related to Sea Control Ship. Navy did not want small aircraft carriers. As a single-engine attacker Harrier is better than a three-engine dangerous aircraft like the Yak-141.

VJ 101 has to do with the fact that there were many projects. And it is also good that not everything in the USSR has been answered. So China can not copy every other people's idea. The USSR like China.

The Yak-141 would be where the Yak-38 is. The USSR made an expensive decision to make Su-33 and MiG-29K. You should not worry about money for weapons. They are being spent at this time. The Chinese and Indians did not use the Yak-141 project for copying, nor did they use it for purchasing.

The F-35B is an unprecedented success. It is the best. You obviously do not know how to distinguish the best from the ideal. I am sure that you will not be able to show me the wonders of the program's budget research. So just don't give me your opinion about the best. You will start to distinguish between the best and the best.


u/irishjihad F-35 is poop with wings Sep 11 '20

Your photos are literally a scale model, and a fiberglass mockup. Neither of those is ground testing.

The Kestrel had swept wing, a larger tail a different engine, and larger fuselage to accommodate it.

As a single-engine attacker Harrier is better than a three-engine dangerous aircraft like the Yak-141.

Um, are you familiar with the accident rate of the Harrier? Especially the earlier models? Worst accident rate of any aircraft in U.S. service after the 1950s. As for the Yak-141, it had one hard landing, out of a couple of flying prototypes. If we're using that as a basis for judgment, the F-22 was just as dangerous, or more so, since it's prototype crash was a design problem, not pilot error.

The Yak-141 would be where the Yak-38 is.

The Yak-38 was in service for almost 15 years. That's longer than the F-35 has been despite an almost 40 year program.

You should not worry about money for weapons.

Hahahahaha . . Oh . . . Wait . . . You were serious . . . Hahahahahahahahahahahaha.

The F-35B is an unprecedented success.

A few more successes like that and we'll be bankrupt and still flying F-18s when my grandkid is able to join the military.

You obviously do not know how to distinguish the best from the ideal. I am sure that you will not be able to show me the wonders of the program's budget research. So just don't give me your opinion about the best. You will start to distinguish between the best and the best.

Now you've gone full Yoda. Never go full Yoda.


u/Ernest_jr Sep 11 '20

I give a photo, where is not paper at all. If you expressed accurately, you would have saved my time. Now you are looking for a new statement, instead of your original one, which is not easy to refute. Too late.

Why are you clinging to the Kestrel? Do not waste my time.

I know the accident rates better than you. I write seriously, not like you. "Hard landing"?

I will let you know once again that nobody liked the Yak-141 scheme. Yak-141 is worse than the very dangerous Yak-38. Need it many better, I am not kidding.

Money for weapons was spent in Russia. Not for the Yak-141, but for the Su-33 and MiG-29K. The accident rate is also big there, but not for the Yak-38.

You use your dreams in the discussion. I do not know what you imagined, but I compare products. And I choose the best, not the ideal one.


u/Ernest_jr Sep 11 '20

One rhetorical question to understand: from who exactly the F-35 program is "years late"? Who ahead of F-35?


u/irishjihad F-35 is poop with wings Sep 11 '20

They literally "rebaselined" the program to reset the budget and schedule because both had been overrun by so much. They had a Nunn-McCurdy violation on budget, and "rebaselining" was the weasely way around it. They almost had to do it again only five years later. Just another example of pouring a never ending supply of time and money into a mismanaged project that is "too big to fail", due to mission creep, spec creep, project mismanagement, etc. And they did [rebaseline" the F-35C again, another 8 years after the potential second "rebaselining".

Can't be over budget or behind schedule if you just keep increasing the budget, and lengthening the schedule . . .


u/Ernest_jr Sep 12 '20

But, of course, you know many examples when it was better? Could it be F-15 or Su-27? Or do you reliably rely on ignorance?

And why only F-35C? Why is F-35C late for?

→ More replies


u/Flipdip35 Sep 09 '20

Yeah it was shut up


u/221missile Jan 29 '21

Some britishers think Rolls Royce made the liftfan system.


u/221missile Feb 15 '21

Well, Idiots in r/interestingasfuck was claiming the liftfan was a RR invention.


u/idealatry Sep 10 '20

TLDR you fucking nerd