F35 jet has crashed into the sea...why?

[Monkeh]

A military airplane that is best kept dry. Might be another parallel to the Starfighter i mentioned above

You'll find preventing water and other debris entering a non-running turbine is normal for, uh, everything with a turbine.

[dietert1]

Are you saying they did not take off the covers from the air intakes? Miracles over miracles.

PS: The next big thing will be a supersonic jet that works as a helicopter - and a submarine. It can take a dive, then resurface with some built-in balloons and jump start into the air like a Polaris missile.

[Monkeh]

That is what the article suggests, not me.

[coppercone2]

its reminiscent of leaving cloths in the fuel tanks of the boeings

[Gyro]

Unfortunately the story appearing in the 'Daily Fail' doesn't add the greatest credibility to the account.

There also seem to be logical inconsistencies - the rain cover being sucked into the engine, but also seen floating on the surface after the crash? If it had gone into the engine at full thrust, I would have though it would have been instantly shredded or gone to be bottom with the plane.

Would the engine actually start (through air starvation or protective monitoring systems) if the cover(s?) was in place? Edit: would it be able to taxi?

[David Hess]

Even with that complexity, we will still be lacking an "air superiority" fighter capability, lacking a durable ground attacker (like the A10), a durable twin engine (like the Tomcat) for over-water flying...

The Tomcat, and its long range Phoenix missile, were retired and not replaced because the threat they were specifically designed to counter, long range Soviet Naval Aviation, was gone.

I think they expect lightweight precision guided "smart" munitions to replace the A-10 for ground support, and I think they should, but I am unaware of any development program for a ground based localizer to support it.

I think the F35 will accelerate the drones-only future.  That may not be bad, but we don't need to spend trillions getting there.

That will happen no matter how the F-35 performs.

Yet, they can not beat farmers wearing slipper carrrying half century AK-47, for 20 years. 

LIC (low intensity conflict) is very different from the type of warfare the military was equipped and trained for, and the politicians were educated for, if they even cared.  The war was "won" in the sense of military objectives, but so was Vietnam.

[wasyoungonce]

I just cannot fathom that the intake cover was left in place.   It would be sucked down the intake and chewed up badly......chewing the engine as well.

Its the Ground crews job to prep acft (pre-flight) before flight and the pilots job to walk around the Acft inspect it before he straps in.

Total failure all over.    Yes I have seen similar, sadly.   They will undoubtedly crucify all involved.   But training costs are so high they cannot afford to dump the pilot.   He will become a better pilot from this mistake.  Sadly the cost of this is rather high.

[wasyoungonce]

I think they expect lightweight precision guided "smart" munitions to replace the A-10 for ground support, and I think they should, but I am unaware of any development program for a ground based localizer to support it.

The US is putting in a lot of money to re-fit and upgrade the A10.  It is indeed the ultimate ground support that a remote standoff weapon cannot support the ground troops.

The JSF F35 was supposed to replace A10.   Using a $100M tool in replacement of a $20M tool, and the F35 cannot do half the close ground support job, has now been recognised as, "stupid".

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/37233/the-a-10-warthog-is-preparing-for-its-biggest-upgrade-in-over-a-decade

[AlbertL]

Unfortunately the story appearing in the 'Daily Fail' doesn't add the greatest credibility to the account.

I only read the stories that mention "endless, toned pins" or "pert derriere".

[BravoV]

[wasyoungonce]

Those figures, we call serviceability rate in our Airforce, are about right.  Though at 75SQN (F18s, years back) we had a rate of pretty mush 87% at all times.  That's because that SQN had part priority over other SQNs.  77SQN was around 72% serviceability at best of times.

That said, they calculate mission capable rate differently to Australia. We count the serviceable rate of Acft ready for flight in the morning or ready for planned missions.   A lot of all nighter's were done at 75SQN. 

I noted the F35 rate dipped then rose.  They might be sorting their parts issues.  But the F22 rates are abysmal.   Maybe they are having modifications or structural fixes.  Maybe they spend a lot of time fixing surface coatings?

[David Hess]

The US is putting in a lot of money to re-fit and upgrade the A10.  It is indeed the ultimate ground support that a remote standoff weapon cannot support the ground troops.

I wasn't referring to a standoff weapon, but something more like an automated stealthy loitering bomb truck, or a mortar which lofts smart munitions.  But the idea relies on soldiers equipped with localizers to mark targets and I am not aware of any serious development in that direction.

Update: something I did not notice until after writing this post is that they are enhancing the standoff weapons capability of the A10.

The JSF F35 was supposed to replace A10.   Using a $100M tool in replacement of a $20M tool, and the F35 cannot do half the close ground support job, has now been recognised as, "stupid".

I agree that whatever would be required to replace the A10, the F35 is not it.

[TerraHertz]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10236491/100m-F-35-fighter-jet-crashed-cheap-rain-cover-hadnt-taken-off.html

I didn't think the F35 COULD take off horizontally from an aircraft carrier? That was the prime reason for there being a vertical take off version, so it could be used on carriers?

The graphic in that dailymail aricle is probably total bunk. The plane was presumably taking off vertically, and had an engine or fan failure. Hence the pilot coming down close enough to get hung up over the ship's side, hanging by the snagged parachute. If we can believe _anything_ in the press about the event.

The story about the rain cover - over what? The wing air intakes? Or the top fan intake (which has a hatch anyway.) Either it got sucked into a fan or it didn't. If it did, how could it be found floating on the sea afterwards?

Methinks they just don't want to admit it had an intrinsic power plant failure on takeoff. Because that might imply the plane is a 35M$ lemon. (Which it is.)

[Monkeh]

No, it wasn't and cannot practically take off vertically.

[Faringdon]

https://news.sky.com/story/leaked-footage-shows-moment-british-f35-jet-crashes-into-mediterranean-during-hms-queen-elizabeth-carrier-take-off-12482611

..its just the inevitable consequence..of what happens when you outsource  much of your general electronics industry to the other side of the world. You loose the skills[1]. The same skills that are needed in the F-35. Not to mention that general electronics is the foundation of the rest of electronics......you lose general electronics, and  you lose a big chunk of every other part of electronics, eg, the more specialist areas....because you have lost general electronics.

The pilot, all the way up to, and going up that ramp, appears to not be in control of that F-35...its going too slow...just thank goodness the pilot got out alive....i wouldnt mind betting that unfortunately the poor chap has damaged his spine getting ejected though...that was always a problem with these ejections...probably still is.....can you imagine it happening if your back wasnt totally straight....ejected pilots get  sent for MRI scans immediately following any ejection.

Wouldnt even surprise me if some bias power supply supplying a processor just didnt work...something as simple as that.
If it was a rain cover...then howcome he didnt realise straight away that something was amiss.....and howcome the sensors didnt report it.

[1]....correction "lose the skills"

[xrunner]

Leaked footage appears to show the F-35 falling into the sea -

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-59470276

[Circlotron]

It was probably taking part in an air show.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_air_show_accidents_and_incidents_in_the_20th_century

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_air_show_accidents_and_incidents_in_the_21st_century

[ataradov]

Faringdon is again on the "other side of the world" train.

Yes, it could be a power supply, but if we are wildly speculating, it can be a pilot just got drunk and had no idea what is going on. Is not wild speculations fun? And they also let you push the agenda you like. Two for one deal.

[wasyoungonce]

well its clearly lost thrust for what ever reason looks like the pilot tried to stop.......it didn't.   The F35 is pretty reliable in the air...there have not been many lost so far, considering its in operation all over the world....more than 700 operating so far.

[dietert1]

Looks pretty ridiculous.
Don't jets going to lift off from a carrier start in some kind of trap so the pilot can power the engine up to "full" thrust before release of the trap? How do they check the F35 turbofan needed during short track lift-off? The F35 price certainly justifies check procedures by the buyer. Or is there something like a consumer warranty?

Regards, Dieter

[Daixiwen]

Faringdon is again on the "other side of the world" train.

Yes, it could be a power supply, but if we are wildly speculating, it can be a pilot just got drunk and had no idea what is going on. Is not wild speculations fun? And they also let you push the agenda you like. Two for one deal.

Come on! It's obvious from the video that a Chinese component failed there. It's the only rational explanation for what happened, we don't need all those "experts" and "investigations"

[mfro]

Leaked footage appears to show the F-35 falling into the sea -

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-59470276

It appears the plane has the hatch open for vertical thrust? I thought that thrust rerouting is supposed to be used during landing only?

[Faringdon]

Faringdon is again on the "other side of the world" train.

Not at all.
Read the top post, this is no fault of the other side of the world.

In fact, as soon as i found out the pilot was in good health, i , with my pals, actually toasted and celebrated that F-35 getting sunk to the bottom of the sea!
...You forget that i myself operate a Far Eastern Electronics importation business, so do many of my pals.
Last year i made £35.4 million profit for myself (not anywhere near as much as my mates though)...not bad for sitting about and placing a few orders now and again.....i dont even have to see the products....just get them sent straight to customer.
Thats why, when we found out the pilot was good, we toasted the sinking of the F-35....after all, the situation surrounding it (the destruction of the Western general electronics industry) ...is the reason i get minted for doing very little! All legal!
Most westerners thank me for bringing in  "cheap products" for them...but they dont realise that i take a huge chunk of the money involved all for myself...as much as i can get away with.....and as general electronics in the west diminish's further, and as western manufacturing facilities get further reduced, i, and my pals, stand ready to ratchet the prices up as high as we possibly can. Cheers!

[xrunner]

I've read this same sort of statement in other articles. No other F-35s have been grounded. Operations with the jet are continuing -

The fact that no other jets were grounded following the incident points to the issue with the downed aircraft being very specific and not a more general technical or mechanical fault.

https://news.sky.com/story/leaked-footage-shows-moment-british-f35-jet-crashes-into-mediterranean-during-hms-queen-elizabeth-carrier-take-off-12482611

[Bud]

...You forget that i myself operate a Far Eastern Electronics importation business, so do many of my pals.
Last year i made £35.4 million profit for myself (not anywhere near as much as my mates though)...not bad for sitting about and placing a few orders now and again..

35 million pounds a year means you were making 96 Thousand pounds Every Single Day. Was a reason with all that wealth to work as a power supply designer at some penny company?