f-35 Thrust Vectoring

[Universeschild89]

thats not thrust vectoring it cant move its nozzles at flight in up and down side to side motion, the russians have mastered thrust vectoring on the su-37.

[BWCmike]

@Universeschild89 I think it can actually

[mauricioalfredo83]

sorry thats no thrus vectoring ...and second Yak woerked whit lookhead to create this cancelled airplane, thats couse it looks so much whit the Yak 141

[MrVn1080]

so cool...i want that cool job. create killing machine :D

[Skunkworksblackhover]

I like the F-22 and the F-35 both as well as many other jets foriegn and domestic. I say shut down the building of the F-22 sooner. Then design the thrust vectoring abilities of the F-22 into the F-35 in terms of the Air-force version and maybe even some navy versions. Then of course for the STOL version stick with the lift fan and rotating rear exhaust. This will elminate the F-22 and reduce some spending, but allow the F-35 to gain some great aspects of the F-22. This is just my opinion

[coo1aid]

Not thrust vectoring. This is how the JSF goes in to 'Hover mode".

[G777GUN]

It would be pretty stupid if they did forget who they were working for.

[mrcharles007]

name one foreign forth or fifth generation fighter jet. whose top speed is below mach 2. speed kills in combat

[thatoneguy12ize]

ISNT THAT JUST THE HOVERING?

[mrcharles007]

that is not thrust vectoring!

[IraznaGameplay]

@mrcharles007 Sorry, but how is this not thrust vectoring?

[mrcharles007]

@IraznaGameplay VTOSL, thrust vectoring is what the f-22 and su-35 has to make the jet more agili in flight. the f-35 is not a very agile plane. and its too slow to compete with fifth gen. fighters like the t-50 and j-20

[Ciphertang3t]

@mrcharles007 you do realise the f22 and f35 use the same powerplant? i took a tour of the lockheed martin facility

[iceagescrat1]

@Ciphertang3t Really? I was pretty sure the f 22 uses the f119-pw-100, and the f-35 uses the pw f135. Btw realize is spelled realize. :)

[Ciphertang3t]

@iceagescrat1 my mistake, it was a few years ago when i went, and i often mishear things.

[iceagescrat1]

@Ciphertang3t Haha! Lol.

[mrcharles007]

@Ciphertang3t ok. fact the f-35 is a poor air to air fighter. it only carries four missiles internaly it is slow and has poor agility. there will always be a need for close air to air combat. countries like china and russia will develop sensors to better detect stealth fighter. they have superior air to air missiles and their fighters even the stealth fighters is faster and more agile. the JSF were designed by a bunch of delusional techno freaks who does not know anything about air combat.

[CBud727]

@mrcharles007 The reason the F-35 is not as maneuverable and superior as it should be is because the US gov't wanted to make a JSF that was multi-purposed for each branch of armed services and most of all affordable! It is due to lack of funding that this plane is not built to be the most agile & dangerous jet fighter. Don't blame the designers. They did a great job given their budget and the expectations. Blame the gov't for spending the money that they don't have! Now we see the results.

[Inklebonker1]

@mrcharles007 Thrust vectoring is the ability to direct the thrust in different directions and that is what this plane is doing in this video.

[Ciphertang3t]

@Inklebonker1 but not for manuverabilty.

[Inklebonker1]

@Ciphertang3t does it matter?

[iceagescrat1]

@mrcharles007 Then what is? This is thrust vectoring.

[Ciphertang3t]

@iceagescrat1 this is the nozzle swinging down for its STOVL and hovering capabilities thrust vectoring is designed for more maneuverability. now the bit at the end then the nozzle is facing down is technically thrust vectoring, but for stability, not maneuvering.

[edwardtang1977]

is this the engine that requires you to dump fuel to hover? I don't think it is on the standard models. Only on hovering models. The F22 is a good stealth plane..this is crap

[IraznaGameplay]

@edwardtang1977

The f-22 craptor?

[starknight97]

@IraznaGameplay f22 current best out their

[IraznaGameplay]

@starknight97

T-50 PAK FA?

F-35 isn't crap. It costs about as much as the f-22 now. Newer technology, more reliable, not saying it is better, but its a very very good plane.

[starknight97]

@IraznaGameplay t-50 not out yet but give the f22 the best run. The fact the f35 is now the same cost is the first major fail. It was supposed too be a lot cheaper. As far as newer true for a sort time the f22 going as we speak though modernization program and repair update. Though i'll say this when the t-50 pak fa and the f35 lighting even meet one day on different sides it be the f35 going down unless the t50 pilot a idiot. u.s. best hope to date is the f22b/c version.

[starknight97]

This is TV for vtol it can't be used in a air to air combat arena.

[SaberTanker22]

I think this Engine of the F-35 could be will more advance then the Harrier jump jets with where relentless retired with is sad . i love engineering stuff what can i say =)

[y2jon2007]

this is how a jet fighter takes a dump

[F35JSFA1]

F-35 doesnt even need thrust Vectoring..

The DAS which it has been installed in the F-35, the F-35 can fire missiles, and hit the target, from any angle, so there's no need to turn around to engage a target during dogfighting

[wellerocks]

@F35JSFA1 Ok well, the F-35's all-angle missile firing system is not very special. Many of the current 4.5 generation fighter jets are or are currently developing missiles that could be fired without using the line-of-sight propagation. However most air-air combats will take place in BVR combat nonetheless. But Lockheed themselves set the bar for the "5th gen" title and they required thrust vectoring. So technically they're contradicting their own statements by entitling it a 5th gen jet.

[F35JSFA1]

@wellerocks perhaps Lockheed title the F-35 due to it Stealthiness, the advance avionics, vertical lift for carrier variant.. I do hope to see the live dogfight of a F-35

[starknight97]

@F35JSFA1 Will it guns still fire straight and if it gets jammed das will not work cause the missile be jammed so Das be useless in a jamming fight with a su35s.

[F35JSFA1]

@starknight97 i hope there is some weapons redundancy

[starknight97]

@F35JSFA1 If you think of it the f15se is redundancy in weapon systems. Or do you mean in the jamming?

[F35JSFA1]

@starknight97 haha.... no offence bro... welll weapons redundancy means... when F-35 is using Das to target enemies... and if DAS jammed or it's down.. I am sure the pilot will be able to switch to primary lock and fire mode for the remaining missile in the payload

[starknight97]

@F35JSFA1 Right this were f35 fails. Why because now she has too get a dog tale again to get a standard lock on. In sort let the missile see the target once the missiles sees the target you can't jam them anymore. Over all though i can see the f35 betting the j20 but the pak fa no way. Better RCS, much bigger and better radar array as in seeing stealth. the t50 pak fa will see the f35 from like 50+km wile the f35's DAS will see at 36 km or less will be the first thing to see the pak fa.Hence f22

[F35JSFA1]

@starknight97 hello? F-35 is stealth... no radar can detect its RCS and i doubt your T50 Pak Fa.. because i have seen the demo of a Real F-35 JSF.. by the way, i am sure u are wrong at F-35 Das seeing thingys at 36km.. live, classified test result shows more interesting fact. peace bro..

[starknight97]

@F35JSFA1 Are you high the best current stealth is the f22 and it can be detected. But the current Irbis-E (su 35) at about 35 to 40km out. The f35 has the same RCS sig as the f-117 and that old sam detected it just fine. Do you even know what you saying DAS is a visual system. The Russian have had that for a wile now. They will not work past 36km 37km+ is BVR only radar can do anything at this range. Things can be as top secret as they like it all leaks now pretty fast.

[F35JSFA1]

@starknight97 come on, i am not high in the F22, F22 also did make my jaws drop and it's just cool.. pls bro, pls.. F35 is different technologies from the F-117A.. i really cant explain to you on the internet.. F-117A is also considered stealth.. but the damn old Soviet SAM detect it because of WATER VAPOURS FORMED on the plane before the raid at kosovo.. for F-35, there is drainage on the exterior.. perhaps russian has their own DAS and their own technologies..

[starknight97]

@F35JSFA1 yes that why even though the f35 has worse shapes for mathematical stealth it still is same because of materials in the construction of the jet. the f22 has both hence why it best right now. j20 is said be better head on only. No it easy the f-117 got 90% of it stealth from shape the f35 is about 50 50. Also the old wave length of that radar don't bounce away as easy as newer radar. Russia has study this for years now whits why the su 35 radar is so good. we have to play catch up.

[F35JSFA1]

@starknight97 F-117 uses mathematical stealth design but the F-35 uses laser design pattern for the stealth enhancment package. Bro, i believe F-35 will do a good job as a multirole fighter.. an replacement to super hornet and a recon fighter jet

[starknight97]

@F35JSFA1 will of course laser are the best tool we have for measurement and designs most tolerance. Though the vtol design built into the f35 killed it stealth over all the materials barley brought it back to the f117 rcs. Better the Boeing though. Yeah it'll be better then the f18 super easy. not as good as E-2D Hawkeye but that get downed easy too though the f35 will not be so easy. oh and only a bit slower the the f18

[GelandnaleG]

0:40

[suraxis]

Christ, that has to be a complete bitch to trouble shoot.

[dabaddestrican]

The SU-27 is a pice of shit. It looks pretty flying through the air. But our F-35 has superior avionics, weapons, pilots, and is invisible to radar. And you will never see a dogfight with both fighters flying through the air trying to look pretty. Besides, the F-35 will destroy the SU-27 from (B.V.R.) beyond visual range. The SU-27 pilot will never know what hit him. One minute hes flying pretty through the air...the next minute hs blown to pieces by our F-35. THE RUSSIANS CANT FUCK WITH US!

[skippyskater]

@dabaddestrican Actually the Su-27 is a very sophisticated, agile aircraft. You seem to think that just because they are of Russian make, (presuming your US) The US is always going to be better, you are wrong, the Sukoi Su-27 was made to keep up with the ever advancing US, who at the time had been working on the F-15. The 27 was designed to keep up with the US' technologies and thats excactly what it did.

[starknight97]

@skippyskater The su 27 is as outdated as the f15e. now if you mean su35s or mig 35 yes these are 4.5 gen fighters. Though stealth is a nice first shot way of attacking and hence the russian pak fa.

[SilentEagles]

The F-35 doesn't have thrust vectoring. I suggest they upgraded F135 engines with Axisymmetric vectoring use by F-16 VISTA General Electric F110.

[chasy2007]

Good presentation of the Russian technologies... Only 20 years later :)

[LgndryThndr]

@chasy2007

yeah thats why you cock suckers haven't ruled the skies since 1960.

you had like a fucking ten year whoopie and you think you're tough shit.

[chasy2007]

@LgndryThndr

I not whom did not offend...

And I have told that I see...

[LgndryThndr]

@chasy2007

That wasn't even english.

[CrotchRocket78]

@chasy2007 US actually designed thrust vectoring for jets,, Thanks....

[snowier5]

im pretty sure in addition to its STOVL ability it has thrust vectoring as well... what is all the fuss about anyway? the majority of you guys probably dont work on this project.

[justgetmeaname]

does the f-35b actally have thrust vectoring?

[demonofrazgriz333]

@justgetmeaname nah, but it does vave vtol capability, which makes it just as versitile.

[reddwarf50]

this is not thrust vector you want to see thrust vector see MiG35 or Su37 or 35. And they have 3-D thurst vector compared to F22 which can accomplish only 2-D.

[henik9]

Your a moron.

[Ironoff]

usa SUCKS SHIT, F22 COMPLETE FAILURE MADE BY A BUNCH OF BULLSHITTERS. usa ALL SHOW, NO GO. NOW usa IS 15 TO 20 YEARS BEHIND. F22 PLATFORM IS OBSOLETE.

[jgtheman84]

how is the f-22 platform obsolete? what jet is better than the f-22? none.

[123456789mischief]

@jgtheman84 well in his fantasy world I am sure there is a jet that makes the F22 obsolete.

USA all show no go?  well I would say the F15 has kind of proven that wrong 100-0 for air to air.

just a troll who is pissed that his russian jets are going to continue to be targets. they are installing a new system in the migs & sukhois now that will save pilots lives. Its an auto eject system. when the computer thinks an F22 is in the area it ejects the pilot.

[muthatrukka24]

are you high?!

[Spetsnazovets]

F-35 is a battle interdiction plane. Basically a CAS aircraft that can do long-range shooting. However its stealth is very compromised after SDD. Its shaping is insufficient for deep defence penetration and would require same tricks as non-stealth plane and I can give you a link that will prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that this is NOT a fighter in a close-combat sense. If you want the link message me. In fact F-35 is a modern day F-105.

[cablebeach1]

"In fact F-35 is a modern day F-105. "

Yes, in the sense that it is a fighter bomber.

"this is NOT a fighter in a close-combat sense"

The F-35 is able to outperform the F-16 and F/A-18s. Also with HOBS and DAS and ETOS it has a very great advantage with Situational Awareness when 90% of all kills in dogfights are won due to the killer finding the prey first.

[slapyousilly3]

@dslcobra hey dumb ass i gave you the link to a non cgi video of the F35 hovering so... who fucked up? and by the way working on and flying freaking Cessna's doesn't mean you know crap about military aircraft to be talking shit about how it will never work you don't know what the hell your talking about unless your an engineer who's worked on this kind of thing you should just shut your hole

[slapyousilly3]

your a moron look up F35 hovering here on you tube and you will see that it can easily VTOL stop living in the past technology is changing and more things are becoming possible faster than you might think

[patio87]

Hippies working on the JSF.

[harman443]

its not thrust vectoring thats how the STOV takes off like an harrier jump jet

[mobius1aic]

It is thrust vectoring. It's redirecting engine thrust downwards. It's only too bad the JSF doesn't have 3D TVS for the exhaust nozzle itself for regular flight and dogfighting.

[ALFskorp]

Perfectly!!! Necessarily send it to Georgia Saakashvili!!!)))

[tonygogap]

cool

[ayonkish]

for slider8585 i sait to you again ,JSF copy XEROX from russian jet YAK 141. APOLLO 11 roket from cientific NAZI Wernher von Braun , I use just my brain

hasta la vista baby !

[EmperorofTerra]

The US was not able to put in the same engine, the F-22 has, so yes, they had to take it over from the YAK 141, so the F-35 with a few modernisations is faster than the MIG-29 and technologically superior to other MIG and SU allrounders. Take whatever you want. Pilot helmet, design, stealth, target aquisation, fuel, range etc.

[C420sailor]

if you think that the Yak 141 and the F-35 are anything alike other than the fact that they both are STOVL, you're a fucking idiot

[TryAgain1986]

AMEN!!! the F-35 is so different in every way

[starknight97]

@C420sailor Sure the f35 system is a bit more advanced . yet the first idea for a vtol like this was in a yak 141 long ago.

[Skunkworksblackhover]

@C420sailor Just my thoughts thrown in. I see the Yak141 being very similiar to the F-35, in more ways than just being a VTOL or STOL aircraft. The Yak has a rear vectoring exhaust that pivots down just like the F-35. In the front it has the jet nozzles facing down to lift the front up. The f-35 uses a lift fan driven off the main engine. Even down to the doors covering top(intake) of engine/fan. I agree they are different in most asspects. they have a very similiar concept for the STOL/VTOL

[Skunkworksblackhover]

@C420sailor I agree with you for the most part. I also think the Yak has a few features regarding the concept and layout of the design for the STOL/VTOL. The rear pivoting exhaust in to the downward poistion looks like the F-35. Of course the engine with cover in the front looks similiar to the lift fan and cover on the F-35. That is where it stops though. This of course is just my thoughts. I am no expert. I love aviation and all types of planes. So I think both planes are cool and

[slider8585]

I spot 4 users who think they have knowledge of real world aeronautical engineering. They often confuse this with their knowledge on operating flight sims such as FS2004 and FSX.

Ramble on, kiddies.

[cywolf32]

Who are you referring to actually?

[slider8585]

Not you, relax.

[ayonkish]

JSF 35 copy xerox from RUSSIAN YAK 141

[grame141]

i have never seen the yak fly at super sonic or even do half the things the JSF can do

[slider8585]

Yet another individual who rambles before thinking.

[nanoload]

What the F-35 does isn't thrust vectoring. It called STOLV.

[cywolf32]

Anytime an engines thrust is redirected from its original path to a different direction or "vector", it is thrust vectoring hence the term. STOVL simply implies a capability that the acft can perform, which is Short Takeoff Vertical Landing. Here's an analogy for you. If you take a water hose and redirect the water coming out with your hand, you are vectoring its direction. If you disagree, let me know.

[nanoload]

Technically, yes. But the F-35 can't incorporate thrust vectoring during the flight, only when the pilot decides to land using STOVL.

[cywolf32]

I already mentioned that if you look above. The system is used for takeoff as well.

[nanoload]

Yes but still, unlike the F-22, the F-35 can't incorporate thrust vectoring during the flight, It can't make tiny adjustments to increase its maneuverability.

[ipodkiller6]

the f-35 was was built with air to ground attacks and even though the f-22 can do that it's meant for air to air and stealth fighting

[nanoload]

Ok, but still the F-35 can't incorporate thrust vectoring during the flight itself. It's a fact, you can't argue with that.

[ipodkiller6]

the fact is that the f-35 is cheaper to build and we don't need many dog fighting jets as we need air to ground bombers; and since the f-35 can use thrust vectoring to take off vertically from an aircraft carrier, they're more useful.

[nanoload]

Maybe you're right, but AGAIN, every avionics expert will tell you that although it is some kind of thrust vectoring, nobody calls it that way cause it simply CAN'T USE IT DURING THE FLIGHT ITSELF.

[vidcritic27]

Well, what do you call it when it stops during mid-flight and lands vertically? Isn't that FLIGHT?

[nanoload]

WHAT I MEANT is that it can't use thrust vectoring to increase maneuverability. This is what you normally refer to in "thrust vectoring".

[vidcritic27]

I suppose you are looking at it in a conventional flight point of view, and in that case you would be correct, but thrust vectoring is anytime thrust is redirected.

[vidcritic27]

I get what you are saying. I wonder though if this form of vectoring COULD be used in flight.

[cywolf32]

Thrust vectoring is thrust vectoring no matter if its used to increase manouverability or control flight operations. They flight tested a commercial acft to see if they could control the acft with engine thrust alone if the flight controls failed. You are making this way more complicated than it needs to be. The simplest answer is usually the right answer..............

[rpenri]

@nanoload

Thrust vectoring can be used to increase the angle of attack of the airplane's nose so that weapons' boresights can be brought onto the target faster and quicker...good for targets too close for missiles or when you don't have the ability to lock on after launch and direct the missile with your helmet system.

[m0f0yu0]

@rpenri actually, that is wrong. Thrust vectoring does not increase the AoA, the wing shape and size do (see F-18 wing shape). TV only assists in maneuverability when conventional control surfaces would be useless (in high AoA, V/STOL or vacuum) or overloaded by aerodynamic forces.  You can have both or each exclusively.

[rpenri]

@m0f0yu0

What? Where do you get your info from? You are incorrect in your assessment. An aircraft banking hard can increase his AoA further than what the control surface allows (especially in slow turns)...an airplane doing a hard turn can further his AoA easily by vectoring thrust straight up, pulling the nose up...thus increasing AoA.

Doing so will increase AoT which will allow a guns solution but at the cost of energy/speed.

[m0f0yu0]

@rpenri Basic Aerodynamics. You are heuristically correct, but made a statement that can be fatal in aircraft design.

The major mistake is that if a wing shape is not inherently unstable, it will be unable to achieve high AoA, thus, simply "thrusting" into a high-alpha maneuver is incorrectly worded. Also, at too slow of a term, the word "AoA" is no longer applicable-it is simply a stall.

[m0f0yu0]

@rpenri But I do agree that the ultimate benefit is exceedingly high maneuverability, both for weapons lock and simply being able to out-turn, and in the case of the beautifully designed F22, outpace and outclimb the OPFOR

[sw9carbon]

you would only need trust vectoring for dog fights and super manovourbility( spelt wrong)

[cywolf32]

WRONG!!! STOVL operations require thrust vectoring in order to facilitate this requirement.

[seongoh]

@cywolf32 NOT WRONG! This version of F-35 has a special 90 degree thrust vectoring for its STOVL capability, but thrust vectoring was originally used for superior maneuverability in air to air combats. F-22 can have up to 20 degrees of thrust vectoring, but can't STOVL.

[tadanorm]

@seongoh no the harrier had thrust vectoring before the f-22 and it was stovl

[slider8585]

I just love when people ramble before thinking.

[pianomansas]

@nanoload No its called thrust vectoring moron

[suraxis]

This system is going to be a nightmare to troubleshoot when it hits the fleet.

[PrinzEugn]

Everything's hard to troubleshoot when first deployed... the F-15 radar was a nightmare for the first few years, for example.

[LoyalRebelion]

Can the JSF use this thrust vectoring in a dogfight? or is it only for take off/ landing?

[cywolf32]

Its only for take off/llanding. It would not be practical to use it in a dogfight and would not help anyway. Speed is your best friend in a dogfight!!

[phonix032]

with the f-35 the harrier could kiss its frontline career goodbye even the marines complain about its complex thrust vectoring and servicing the engine is a pain in the ass ,its very hard to reach it.there has also been alot of accidents due to its complex handling

[foxsecret]

Uhg! Hate to work on that! Coming from a guy who works augmenter sections on GE F101 engines.

However, Fun to watch!

[omnadrener]

The Harrier isnt a good fighter cause of its short bent wings.

[smartass1101]

Thats not thrust vecroring. Thats the vtol system. For the amount of money we paid for it, you would think it would have it.

[christopheros]

What's thrust and what's a vector? Put them together and what have you got?

[odessaboy]

There is a difference between thrust vectoring and thrust redirection. Thrust redirection applies to this aircraft, and other stovl aircraft such as the av-8b harrier II, and the yak-141 freestyle.

Its purpose is to redirect the thrust of the aircraft to take off vertically.

Thrust vectoring simply vectors (limitedly shifts) the direction of the thrust to enhance the maneuverability of the aircraft.

This applies to jets like the f22,35, su-30m etc.

[64thAGGRESSOR]

Its called stovl not vtol

[eyesofthenorth]

no its vertical take-off

[64thAGGRESSOR]

why don't you look it up genius ohh and maybe the writing on the tail section with the letters STOVL means nothing to a moron like your self

[eyesofthenorth]

oh yea sorry . My fault i thought you were saying it wasnt vertical take off

[highchief42]

I think it can take of vertically don't be such a dick. VTOL is a waste of fuel.

[lolobobo]

vertical take-off only if it's empty...

[tadanorm]

@smartass1101  thats thrust vecroring

[ChallengerGuy22]

@smartass1101 its ridiculous that it doesn't have vectored thrust

[chuckshissle]

It's about time the Marines will replace the Harriers.

[eyesofthenorth]

the harrier will always be the best aircraft ever made

[ttkay123]

no WAY is the harrier the best aircraft ever made... it cant even go faster than mach 1

[ttkay123]

i mean i guess since its used by brits you think its the best but at least choose a better plane like a typhoon

[VMFA134]

since it's used by the brits that make me like it less not more. plus, we still have the F-22, which could kick the typhoons ass any day

[ttkay123]

lol no doubt about it but somebody's comment was "the harrier is the best aircraft ever made" but like i said the typhoon is a lot better in handling and speed than a harrier.

[LordXvorthor]

Typical ignorant, dull minded shalldow american CUNT. If you remotely knew ANYTHING about both aircraft you'd know they're both beautifully engineering master pieces. Each providing new technology for the fifth generation jet aircraft family. They both have a such a sophisticated online computer system to make them each handle beyond any other aircraft in their class. the F-22 has a fantastic Stealth and advanced dog fight advantage, where as the typhoon is a incredibly fast multi role fighter.

[VMFA134]

I'd take "fantastic stealth and advanced dog fight advantage" over "Fast multirole fighter" anyday...plus after spending the last 16 years of my life around fighter jets, i definitely feel the F-22 is better

[LordXvorthor]

You just don't get it do you. There designed by different naitons to provide different roles on certain missions. I don't get why almost every whining American feels like there better than everyone else by acting like were all against you. UK and the rest of europe have a bond of friendship and we're all Allies of the coalition forces. Therefore stop acting like one planes better than another, they'll never go up against each other anyway. There both amazing aircraft.

[VMFA134]

because there has been and always will be a friendly rivalry between europe and the U.S. it's just that simple

[CRFpilot22]

Uh yeah your comment about Americans is a hasty generalization and an informal fallacy. Not all Americans are dull minded, fat, ignorant and so forth. On the contrary its more like the typical Euro attitude toward Americans. But I digress, both planes are awesome and I'm especially a big fan of the Typhoon.

[cywolf32]

There is no need to be immature to get your point across. And I agree, both types have lots to offer. I am fortunate enough to have spent 10 years overseas and be in the aerospace field for 11. The video is simply meant for aviation enthusiats to enjoy.

[tacoman202]

Sick!!!!

[holytodsloan]

that is really nice!