Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

F-35 can’t be found after pilot ejected

thedrive.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 693 posts

Re: F-35 can’t be found after pilot ejected

#151

Post by _moof »

giarc wrote: post #64
kashunstva wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the plane is in trim (does the F35 even have manual trim?) and/or on autopilot, I can see a long glide to somewhere with a stable flight path, at least until the loss of thrust due to fuel exhaustion leads to an aerodynamic stall. But in of these circumstances, there would have been no need for the pilot to eject. Strange indeed.

It's the most advanced plane the military has. You would think that an eject would trigger some additional communications or allow remote control of the jet.

Pilots don't eject from controllable aircraft. If the pilot ejected, remote control won't help.

Re: F-35 can’t be found after pilot ejected

#152

Post by mrtksn »

kunwon1 wrote: post #131
btbuildem wrote: post #70

An 80's movie dream is playing out for some rural kids, where they stumble upon a smouldering high-tech wreckage and as they explore it, men in suits pour out of black SUVs and talk to them in taciturn ways. Seriously though, these jets sound terribly overpriced for how unreliable they seem to be.

I'm no expert on aircraft procurement or government contracts (I'm an engineer who used to work on fighter jets) - that being said, it's my understanding that the F-35 is actually a very successful project, and a very affordable one at that. I haven't got any citations or evidence to present, I could be wrong about all of this, it's a topic I've got only casual knowledge about. A broad overview of my understanding of…

All that might turn out to be irrelevant as the drones prove detrimental in a warfare.

With the advancements in AI in recent years, it will probably get harder and harder to justify carrying a biological being and all the support systems onboard. At some point, a warplane capabilities might become irrelevant and the only important aspect would the the implications of carrying a solder onboard and making the downing of the device much more politically significant than downing a drone.

Re: F-35 can’t be found after pilot ejected

#153

Post by cvccvroomvroom »

yabones wrote: post #47

Have they said whether the transponder was active on the jet? They usually have the ADSB beacon live when flying near airports, but if it was turned off it would be a bit trickier to find. Also, if the retroreflector wasn't extended it might be hard for active radar to track it as well. Worst case scenario would be if it was in "full stealth" mode -- that would be the situation where we discover that NORAD air defens…

This is odd because military jets in the area here in the area (in CONUS) invariably have their transponders on.

Re: F-35 can’t be found after pilot ejected

#154

Post by xeromal »

IAmGraydon wrote: post #67
Fluorescence wrote: post #56

This sounds too ridiculous to be true. I'd be more inclined to believe that it's a gambit to flush out an intelligence leak rather than an inability to find their own $160M plane.

It’s definitely BS. Transponders aside, the US has radar and near real-time satellite imagery of every square inch of American territory. There is a zero percent chance they don’t know where this plane is.

There's a handful of missing nukes in the US from some very large crashed planes that we still haven't found.

Re: F-35 can’t be found after pilot ejected

#155

Post by m0llusk »

kunwon1 wrote: post #131
btbuildem wrote: post #70

An 80's movie dream is playing out for some rural kids, where they stumble upon a smouldering high-tech wreckage and as they explore it, men in suits pour out of black SUVs and talk to them in taciturn ways. Seriously though, these jets sound terribly overpriced for how unreliable they seem to be.

I'm no expert on aircraft procurement or government contracts (I'm an engineer who used to work on fighter jets) - that being said, it's my understanding that the F-35 is actually a very successful project, and a very affordable one at that. I haven't got any citations or evidence to present, I could be wrong about all of this, it's a topic I've got only casual knowledge about. A broad overview of my understanding of…

There has been a great deal of honing to the jet and its production processes over time. The prototypes were overpriced and underperforming but with scale all that was overcome.

Re: F-35 can’t be found after pilot ejected

#156

Post by [deleted] »

rplst8 wrote: post #134
HarryHirsch wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's really hard to track with active radar, which is why the first thing NATO does in a foreign country is bomb all TV and radio stations off the air. With passive methods it's no problem at all.

What do TV and radio stations have to do with active radar?

[deleted]

Re: F-35 can’t be found after pilot ejected

#158

Post by njarboe »

mrtksn wrote: post #152
kunwon1 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm no expert on aircraft procurement or government contracts (I'm an engineer who used to work on fighter jets) - that being said, it's my understanding that the F-35 is actually a very successful project, and a very affordable one at that. I haven't got any citations or evidence to present, I could be wrong about all of this, it's a topic I've got only casual knowledge about. A broad overview of my understanding of…

All that might turn out to be irrelevant as the drones prove detrimental in a warfare. With the advancements in AI in recent years, it will probably get harder and harder to justify carrying a biological being and all the support systems onboard. At some point, a warplane capabilities might become irrelevant and the only important aspect would the the implications of carrying a solder onboard and making the downing o…

I believe the F-35 software is designed to allow it to be sort of a forward base for controlling a large number of drones.

Re: F-35 can’t be found after pilot ejected

#159

Post by opwieurposiu »

rplst8 wrote: post #134
HarryHirsch wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's really hard to track with active radar, which is why the first thing NATO does in a foreign country is bomb all TV and radio stations off the air. With passive methods it's no problem at all.

What do TV and radio stations have to do with active radar?

TV and radio stations can be used for passive radar. Passive radar is when you use existing radio sources as you illumination source and your radar system is listen-only. Stealth aircraft tend to be more visible on passive radar since passive is usually a longer wavelength that the aircraft was not designed for. You can even DIY a passive radar.

https://spectrum.ieee.org/passive-radar-with-sdr

Re: F-35 can’t be found after pilot ejected

#160

Post by belter »

kunwon1 wrote: post #131
btbuildem wrote: post #70

An 80's movie dream is playing out for some rural kids, where they stumble upon a smouldering high-tech wreckage and as they explore it, men in suits pour out of black SUVs and talk to them in taciturn ways. Seriously though, these jets sound terribly overpriced for how unreliable they seem to be.

I'm no expert on aircraft procurement or government contracts (I'm an engineer who used to work on fighter jets) - that being said, it's my understanding that the F-35 is actually a very successful project, and a very affordable one at that. I haven't got any citations or evidence to present, I could be wrong about all of this, it's a topic I've got only casual knowledge about. A broad overview of my understanding of…

Well at least in close combat we know who turns first: "F 16 vs. F 35 - Turn Comparison" - https://youtu.be/SPqUvCnWcrk
Post reply on HN