Supposed F35 carrier deck crash, leaked footage.

a reply to: imitator

You as opposed to the Pacific Pivot a few years ago, when we briefly ramped up activity in the South China Sea? You are under the mistaken impression that ONLY the Navy is increasing operations in the region. You don't go from having enough pilots to a pilot shortage in a year.

Hmm, from 2019-

A recent report, which provides one of the most comprehensive pictures of the military-wide pilot shortage, shows the root of the Navy’s pilot problem is similar to the one the Air Force is facing. Both services are losing the retention battle with experienced pilots.

A Defense Department report sent to Congress outlines a short fall of 1,242 aviator billets in the Navy – that includes pilots and navigators – in 2018. The service is experiencing higher than average pilot loss rates, especially in the mid and senior officer levels.

federalnewsnetwork.com...

From 2020-

The United States military has a serious pilot shortage. The United States Air Force first warned lawmakers in March 2018 that the service had a shortfall of 10 percent or roughly twenty-one hundred of the twenty-one thousand pilots needed to execute the National Defense Strategy. While the shortfall isn’t as significant, the U.S. Navy is also facing a fighter pilot shortage.

nationalinterest.org...

From 2018-

* The Navy has similar problems with its fighter pilot manning levels, GAO said. In 2013, the Navy was 57 fighter pilots short, or 12 percent, at the completion of their first operational tour at sea, which is completed between three and six years of service. By 2017, that gap had swelled to 136 fighter pilots, or 26 percent short of what the Navy was authorized, GAO said.* The Navy has similar problems with its fighter pilot manning levels, GAO said. In 2013, the Navy was 57 fighter pilots short, or 12 percent, at the completion of their first operational tour at sea, which is completed between three and six years of service. By 2017, that gap had swelled to 136 fighter pilots, or 26 percent short of what the Navy was authorized, GAO said.

www.militarytimes.com...

Oh my god, you're right! It's all Biden's fault! Why didn't we see this before???

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: imitator

Still may have operators of a sorts combined with some form of artificial intelligence that can also be tasked to complete or carry out the mission or elements of such.

As to its sexuality, i dont have a clue, or can see why it would be a thing as long as it does what it says on that big expensive tin.

I was sort of joking around lol... but I would rather have an Alpha nerd than a Beta nerd controlling/writing AI hardware and software. It all translates to dominance.

a reply to: Zaphod58

The point is they are taxing their shortages by increased activity.

originally posted by: imitator
I think time will speak for the F-35... how many have crashed or been in the sea?

Six have crashed, three of them into the water, with two significant accidents outside of those crashes. That's with them having flown over 470,000 hours worldwide, with over 750 aircraft currently delivered.

a reply to: imitator

And it's not making the shortage worse, because pilots don't just quit. If anything, pilot training has accelerated and more pilots are being trained. The shortage is actually smaller than it was in previous years. Even with the change to the Pacific.

a reply to: Zaphod58
That's a damn good rate.

Consider that the F-8 Crusader's accident rate was 3.26 per 10,000 flying hours
The F-14's was 5.45 per 100,000 flight hours

a reply to: Zaphod58

I think ramping up operations while having a pilot shortage is not a good idea... especially with a brain-dead president recruiting the Queer Eye cast. That's a show with a bad ending.

a reply to: JIMC5499

The F-16, in its first year of operations, had a 621.12 Class A rate. From 1975-1993, it was 5.09. It's lifetime rate is currently 3.30. The F-15 lifetime rate is currently 2.29. The F-35 is currently at 2.22, with three Class A mishaps on record. That will continue to drop. I'm not sure what the worldwide rate is though, but it's significantly lower.

a reply to: imitator

Doing more with less has been a goal of the military for the last 20 years.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Doing more with less has been a goal of the military for the last 20 years.

of course... we have more illegals in the military nowadays and less Americans wanting to join.

Plus, being less than qualified is a goal of our illegitimate government...

a reply to: Zaphod58

Try 40 years.

Please...

Keep in mind this is a forum to discuss "Aircraft Projects" and not politics as we have other forums for that. Thanks much.

Do not reply to this reminder.

That final left turn on approach looked very close to the carrier with not much time to line up. Much closer than other approaches I've seen. Hotdogging? We'll likely never know.

a reply to: VinMan

If you watch the fantail video, you can hear a big power increase just before he gets to the ship.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Sounds like he was waved off and was trying to get enough power for a go around. I got to wonder if there wasn't an engine issue involved in this.

a reply to: JIMC5499

In a sane world, getting injections with drugs that cause cardiac issues would also remove one from flight status, but this is not a sane world.

This is a world in which military personnel, including aviators, are injected with experimental drugs to supposedly protect against a virus with a 99% survival rate.

Most likely this injected Naval Aviator had to eject because he could not control his aircraft because he felt like he had been slammed in the chest with a baseball bat.

a reply to: Salander

So far I've seen no proof that's what happened. All the pilot had to do was to call out that he was having a problem and the aircraft could have been landed remotely. Apparently that did not happen.

www.usni.org...

I don't like to speculate about crash but if I had to give my 2 cents I would tend to lean toward a human error. Because if they would have suspected a technical issue, they probably would have grounded the F-35C fleet to not take any risk.
I could totally be wrong tho.

But for me the "worst" part of this story isn't so much about the accident itself (which thankfully didn't take any life), it is how pictures and now the video have leaked from the ship. I would guess (and hope), US sailors are aware of the risks of being connected and leaking informations on board a military ship. To me this is a breach in the security.

a reply to: Ghoul

Not really. Most of the time it isn't a security issue. The main concern about this would be if someone had gotten killed and the information would have leaked before the next of kin were notified or even worse the leak miss-identified who was killed. The Navy had announced the incident before any of this leaked and nobody was killed. What they really don't want is if the aircraft had been salvaged, people taking pictures of it in the Hangar Bay while reclamation was going on and classified components were visible.

a reply to: JIMC5499

Disagree... it is a security issue, for one it shows the condition of the aircraft and how much wreckage spread out in the ocean. For example, if China knows the location of the crash (which they do) they could find samples of its skin, stealth sensors and all kinds of stuff, etc...

Biden's woke military will hold no secrets, the new recruits like to gossip and take selfies.