Originally Posted by firehawkzach
Pretty sure the F-35B has Thrust vectoring lol. I think it's kinda cool that we have options the real pilot's don't have lol. They probably should throw thrust vectoring nacelles on the Super Hornet. This feature would probably help the super hornet during carrier and air to air operations.
yes, the F35B has a variant of thrust vectoring you could say, though it's not conventional thrust vectoring. It doesn't help with flying or maneuvering at all except for STOVL. As for the thrust vectoring on a Super Hornet, that isn't necessary. The Super Hornet is a fighter and attack aircraft, thrust vectoring would come into play for close quarters air-to-air combat, and as you say for approaches for a higher AoA. Though there is a huge draw back with vectored thrust. You need to add tons of weight for the actuators to move around 14,000-22,000 pounds of thrust. So in the end, yes you get a higher AoA for carrier approaches and take offs, yet your overall weight increases. This means a linear increase in take off and landing speed, which needs to be kept low to start with, and a decrease in overall flight time and ordnance load.
I agree that it's sweet that model planes can out perform real aircraft, though I don't like how they take a scale plane, and say for the hell of it to add thrust vectoring to make it "cooler". Why not make an F-22, or Su-47 for dual axis thrust vectoring, and then it will be way more scale and perform more like the real thing.