Is a VTOL fighter good or not, and is a VTOL fighter promising?

The most famous VTOL fighters were used in large quantities in combat, such as the Harrier fighter, which was used in large numbers during the Gulf War.

At present, before the F35B is massively equipped, Japan and South Korea are also equipped on their amphibious assault ships (quasi-aircraft carriers).

VTOL fighters are affected by take-off weight, cannot carry too much fuel, too heavy ** equipment.

And considering its unique corner jet engine, it only has a lot of power but not good speed efficiency, and it is relatively complicated to maintain.

But its advantages cannot be ignored, its flexibility, super ground attack capabilities.

Fighters are not as fast as possible, and an important indicator to measure second-generation aircraft is whether they can be supersonic, so you see that most second-generation aircraft have flat heads with shock cones.

When it comes to the third generation aircraft, it is found that in fact, supersonic speed is simply dispensable, modern air combat emphasizes high maneuverability, and better low-speed and low-altitude control is better for ground combat, which is contrary to supersonic speed, so the current third-generation aircraft have more or less reduced supersonic performance.

Early-rise missiles and rockets (especially in small countries) can't keep up with supersonic aircraft, especially supersonic reconnaissance planes like the Blackbird. However, today's air-to-air missiles can fly to Mach 4-5 (Mach 1 = double the speed of sound), so it is necessary to rely on electronic countermeasures and high maneuverability to enhance the survivability of aircraft.

Pure hand lookout.

The disadvantages of VTOL aircraft for fixed-wing aircraft are: short range, slow speed, low payload, and complex maintenance.

Fighter is not the faster the better, high-altitude and high-speed fighter in the low and medium altitude maneuverability is often not good, any thing has both positive and negative, one aspect highlights the advantage, there must be a disadvantage on the other hand, perfection is impossible, do the targeted trade-offs is right.

VTOL stuff isn't very powerful!

No. VTOL fighters have the following drawbacks:

First, it is too fuel-intensive, and one-third of the total fuel will be consumed during vertical take-off. Therefore, it does not have the ability to travel far.

Second, the bomb load is too small, the Harrier fighter has a bomb load of only 2271 kg; In the same period, the American F-14 had 6577 kg, and the comparison is clear at a glance. When the bomb load increases, it is impossible to take off and land vertically, and it is necessary to have a runway, which is not as good as developing conventional fighters.

Third, it is too difficult to operate, and the pilots are not easy to train, and five British planes crashed due to operational errors during the Falklands War, so it took a lot of effort and money.

Fourth, the engine has high environmental requirements when running at full load, and once the sand raised by take-off is sucked into the running engine, immeasurable consequences may occur.

I think the pros outweigh the cons.

Its advantages: 1. It rises and lands quickly, and it is suitable for the battlefield.

2. Flexible and mobile, convenient for transfer.

3 No runway is required, meaning fewer restrictions.

4Because of its small size, it can do a lot of difficult moves and dodge the opponent's blows.

Shortcoming. 1. The low bomb load means that you need to fight in a group to have an advantage, and if you fight alone, the combat effectiveness will be greatly reduced.

2. The operation is difficult, it is easy to have accidents, and it has high requirements for the environment.

3. Frequent maintenance and long time.

The pros and cons first depend on the requirements of use, and the results will be different for different requirements. There is no way to talk about the pros and cons without a premise.