F-35B mishap and ejection - Forth Worth

[NooriNuth]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1603479248794165248

https://twitter.com/x/status/1603479211330658320

https://twitter.com/x/status/1603478579681308672

So nose dive is common factor in these accidents.
May be a software update bug?

 

[Vortex]

Pilot ejects from F-35B near White Settlement, Texas​

Cough cough happens, but yes sometimes at the wrong time. .

 

[PakFactor]

Indian Supremacy
View attachment 906329

The Indians found the solution long ago by leaving the plane hooked to the back of a food truck and dragging it to where it needed to be.

 

[GriffinsRule]

Never seen any other planes enjoy such a high crash rate.

Then you havent seen or researched much in your life

 

[Beast]

At least those become public. The J-10 was falling out of the sky every other quarter some ten years ago.
More importantly, there are now some 800 f-35s delivered flying in conditions from alaska, to deserts to the ocean.
by comparison you have nothing comparable flying with the number of flight hours and definitely no lo vis stovl.
But as the true no knowledge jingoistic troll you are - all you do is copy paste

Sourgrap loser. You think in the age of internet, crashes can be hide in China? Which data did you pull from your rear about J-10 crashes every quarter?

I think the feeling of getting a lemon after paying so much money.. Why not put F-35 made in China, We can give you better QC and cheaper price tag.

 

[Tameem]

Sourgrap loser. You think in the age of internet, crashes can be hide in China? Which data did you pull from your rear about J-10 crashes every quarter?

I think the feeling of getting a lemon after paying so much money.. Why not put F-35 made in China, We can give you better QC and cheaper price tag.

He has over 30 years experience with US F16 Tyres (Puncture Boy basically) his hate towrads J10C is understandable as his services no more required..Just ignore him.

 

[CLUMSY]

Sourgrap loser. You think in the age of internet, crashes can be hide in China? Which data did you pull from your rear about J-10 crashes every quarter?

I think the feeling of getting a lemon after paying so much money.. Why not put F-35 made in China, We can give you better QC and cheaper price tag.

CCP does censor the internet

 

[beijingwalker]

CCP does censor the internet

How come the footage of Shanghai protesters shouting "down with Xi jinping" " down with CCP" is everywhere on the internet? I m in China, in Beijing, tell me one thing that you know which I don't know about China, can you?

 

[Metal 0-1]

Not sharing the F-35s with the TurAF has invited a "divine" retribution! The USA needs to do the redemption ASAP....

Of course, how can we forget about this.

Every fighter jet need a baptism from turkiye itself

 

[gambit]

This is definitely NOT a pilot error. Any qualified pilot wouldve reacted in time. Pilot tried to keep the bird up but engine failed to produce enough thrust or maybe some other technical issue.

Riiiiight...Anything from anyone is a guess at this point, but the issue is how credible is one's guess which should based on knowledge and experience.

The jet was descending vertically with some forward motion. As the jet descends, the body was stable, as in from this side view, no 'bobbing' or nose up/down movements. If there were some roll motions, we would have seen the port (left) wing tip moving up/down as well. So this tells us that the jet was under full command/control from the cockpit during descent.

The jet touched down, then bounced. From all the F-35B videos available, plus sound, once the jet touched ground, jet engine noise hinted at throttle reduction.

Example...

Forward to timestamp 1:00 and see some rolling motions as the jet approaches the landing point. Timestamp 1:36 is where the jet touched ground and throttle reduction. Then rests full stop. This would constitute a normal vertical landing for an F-35B.

Back to the latest mishap...

The jet bounced and literally off the ground on that bounce. Why?

When the jet was off the ground on that bounce, there was a pitch moment -- nose down. It is possible that the bounce created that nose down. Or possible that the stick was touched. Or possible that there was a technical cause.

On that nose down moment, now some engine thrust was directed rear, pushing the jet forward.

Here is the interesting part...Being on contact with something, especially the ground, is a high friction condition, and yet the jet continued some forward motion. This means engine power was still on and enough to push the jet even though the fuselage, not the landing gear, was in full contact with the ground.

Does anyone here have any troubleshooting skills?

 

[925boy]

At least those become public. The J-10 was falling out of the sky every other quarter some ten years ago.

but its a more reliable plane, and your argument doesnt change that.

More importantly, there are now some 800 f-35s delivered flying in conditions from alaska, to deserts to the ocean.

but the US still needs 12 squadrons of fighter jets in the pacific to manage China and the threats there.

by comparison you have nothing comparable flying with the number of flight hours and definitely no lo vis stovl.

and US and F-35 flying countries (like Isarel) still cant win a war with those F-35s..they're too scared to fight...

 

[The Accountant]

When come to Chinese plane. slayer will not say in the same manner,. More like face saving comment from you for American poor QC.

Jet crashes often is not acceptable. Its troll of you trying to tell others it normal. 3-4 crashes a year is pathetic record.

3 to 4 crashes year of a mature platform is a pathetic record but f35 is not yet mature ... Its relatively new and complex technology ... U cant compare accident rates of vtol and traditional fighters ...

Americans have many shortcomings but in terms of tech and quality standards they r one of the best in the world ...

Having said this using same structure for traditional take off and vtol fighter was a risky plan and this was bound to happen ... Vtol design always had risk but with alot of new unmatured tech combined in f35 it was a high risk move and usa will pay the price ... Having said this ... There r 2 questions ... Is f35 reliable ? Answer is not yet ... Is f35 a formidable jet for adversary? Answer is yes ... The data fusion technologies, 5th generation tech made it a very dangerous fighter and usa and china will be the only countries that will be using 5th generation in numbers ... So f35 gave them an edge on overall basis but it will remain an expensive fighter to maintain

 

[Beast]

3 to 4 crashes year of a mature platform is a pathetic record but f35 is not yet mature ... Its relatively new and complex technology ... U cant compare accident rates of vtol and traditional fighters ...

Americans have many shortcomings but in terms of tech and quality standards they r one of the best in the world ...

Having said this using same structure for traditional take off and vtol fighter was a risky plan and this was bound to happen ... Vtol design always had risk but with alot of new unmatured tech combined in f35 it was a high risk move and usa will pay the price ... Having said this ... There r 2 questions ... Is f35 reliable ? Answer is not yet ... Is f35 a formidable jet for adversary? Answer is yes ... The data fusion technologies, 5th generation tech made it a very dangerous fighter and usa and china will be the only countries that will be using 5th generation in numbers ... So f35 gave them an edge on overall basis but it will remain an expensive fighter to maintain

There is no such thing called unmature products and then put into service and endanger lives of pilots and passenger.

Can you imagine B737 Max is called a new tech and unmatured products but put into service to use passenger as guinea pig? Same as F-35, if VTOL is dangerous, US test team shall continue to carry out more testing and eliminated the bugs and not hassle to put into service just to answer to investor, military or public.

That is why you have a lemon B737 Max and F-35 is going that direction. Profit above safety is the motto of US aeronautical slogan currently.

You know why C919 took so long to put into operation? Becos, China aviation wanted to to be totally safe before fit for passenger ferry service.

Same as WS-10 engine which tooks 40 years to put into total service of Chinese combat jet. Chinese value safety above anything and wanted to make sure WS-10 engine is a mature and safe product even the time is long to perfect this product.

 

[The Accountant]

There is no such thing called unmature products and then put into service and endanger lives of pilots and passenger.

Can you imagine B737 Max is called a new tech and unmatured products but put into service to use passenger as guinea pig? Same as F-35, if VTOL is dangerous, US test team shall continue to carry out more testing and eliminated the bugs and not hassle to put into service just to answer to investor, military or public.

That is why you have a lemon B737 Max and F-35 is going that direction. Profit above safety is the motto of US aeronautical slogan currently.

You know why C919 took so long to put into operation? Becos, China aviation wanted to to be totally safe before fit for passenger ferry service.

Same as WS-10 engine which tooks 40 years to put into total service of Chinese combat jet. Chinese value safety above anything and wanted to make sure WS-10 engine is a mature and safe product even the time is long to perfect this product.

Surprising to see such a comment. Real life is different then what u imagine ... Actual testing can never replicate real life experience ...

If u r right than why there r multiple versions of every plane ever made ? Why every new plane get grounded every now and then till it gets mature ?

If u read history then even one of the most successful plane like f16 was similar to this ... Even j10 had such issues while developing ...

Vtol has its risk but benefits as well ... A plane that can be landed anywhere is a huge benefit in real war scenario ... It can refuel and ammunitions can resupplied at middle of no where ...

 

[IceCold]

When the jet was off the ground on that bounce, there was a pitch moment -- nose down. It is possible that the bounce created that nose down. Or possible that the stick was touched. Or possible that there was a technical cause.

A question then shouldn't there be a fail-safe system/computer that should take over if a pilot mistakenly touches the stick or throttle control, therefore nullifying the pilot command which may have happened by mistake?