X-31 24-degree angle of attack landing

On April 29 at NAS Pawtuxet River, Maryland, the unique Vector X-31 made the world's first fully automated, 24-degree angle of attack (AoA) thrust-vectored landing. The high AoA landing marked the final flight in the Vector's three-year ESTOL (extremely short takeoff and landing) program. The project was designed to demonstrate the viability of ESTOL thrust vectoring and was carried out with a collaboration of the U.S. Navy, Germany's Federal Office of Defense Technology and Procurement, the European Aeronautic Defense and Space Company (EADS) and Boeing Aerospace.

Category:

Howto & Style

Tags:

• X-31
• Aviation
• aircraft
• airplanes

[duke00895]

Actually, the F-22 is not as manuverable as this plane, this plane has a more advanced thrust vectoring system

[mobius1aic]

F-22 has a 2-D TV system, the X-31 is full 3D.

[sheldonholy]

AWESOME flying skills.

That computer must have had lots of training.

[banjitson420]

@clouster75 LOL um no, apples and oranges, its way ahead of any of its competitors in maneuverability. this aircraft is far lighter and could turn inside any of the sukhoi planes, but all that doesn't matter anyway this a flight research aircraft, not a combat aircraft.

[starrychloe]

How does he see the runway?

If it is all automated, why do they even need pilots anymore?

[t5239857289578947594]

@oTECHNETIUMo Mongoose maneuver?

[clouster75]

anyway its inferior to sukhoi

[oTECHNETIUMo]

@duke00895 just because this plane has a 3d tv doesnt mean its more manouverable thrust vector only effects pitch and they both have around the same pitch up and down (the raptor does 22 degrees up and down and same with this jet probably) 3d just ads yaw more effectively in than the f 22s.with that being said 2d tv can turn as tight as 3d tv or tighter and vice versa.though i havent seen alot of videos of this jet idk if its more manouverble looks like it though

[childsca]

@101andrewj

You, sir, are an idiot. If you put anyone in any plane after "1 week" of training, they will die. I don't care if you're flying a little Cessna, a Warbird, or an F-16, the end result will be the same. The new jets are not hard to fly, just like the old planes. A majority of the time spent at flight school is learning maneuvers and practicing dogfights.

Also I think I forgot to mention, I am a pilot, and I have flown in both P-51's and a T-38, guess which was easier :)

[101andrewj]

some pilots got dozens of kills after only days of training.... if you put 100 people into a f16 after only a week of training, odds are 90% of them would die in the first few hours of solo flight time, remember... pilots wer younger, less educated, and less trained in ww2, and in a total war ww3 type situation, i think a shit load of modernized old style planes that could be piloted easy would be much more valuable then a f22 and its complicated computers and 1 1/2 year of pilot training

[childsca]

@101andrewj

The flight computer is what makes the new jets easy to fly. They are designed to rely on the computer to make them fly even easier than a warbird but still be maneuverable. And simplicity means nothing when you have to manage every system. In a modern fighter, all the management is done for you, leaving you with the simple task of flying.

Only reason they could push out pilots so fast back then is cause they were desperate. They were just good enough to fly them, that's it.

[101andrewj]

@childsca ye but, you wana try piloting a modern jet without the flight computer, because you will die.... atleast with a ww2 plane, there is alot less to go wrong... and altho it is harder on the body, the simplicity of ww2 planes would deffently make them easier to fly... they wer training pilots in a week, nowadays, it takes years