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

391–400 of 693 posts

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

#391

Post by dragontamer »

LorenPechtel wrote: post #380
dragontamer wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

MANPADs can't even shoot at a jet because they're flying too high. There's only so much rocket propellant you can put onto a shoulder-mounted device that humans have to carry around. If you're only guarded by MANPADs, then a traditional bomber will blast your position repeatedly. The MANPADs are really there to deal with low-flying aircraft (A10 and Helicopters). EDIT: I guess the AC-130 cruises at high speeds, but s…

But you have to fly low to avoid the area SAM defense. Stuff like the Patriot doesn't stop enemy aircraft, it forces them down low where MANPADs and even guns are useful.

Wild Weasel literally is baiting SAM to shoot at them. That's the point of Wild Weasel, you bait the RADAR then kill the air defense before they lock in on you. Any RADAR works by emitting radio waves, and those radio waves can be tracked with a homing missile.

Just looking at the wild weasel causes the RADAR system to possibly be bombed. SAM installations vs Wild Weasel tactics are very complex.

In any case...if your SAM is too scared to engage with the wild weasel, they just bomb you from 12,000 feet altitudes.

Winning at 12,000 feet altitudes 50 miles away is the point of the US Air Force. Their goal is to never even engage at lower altitudes until they know they have won in the standoff, long range game.

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

#392

Post by valec »

dogman144 wrote: post #247
valec wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The F-35 has a much faster response time than the A-10--and, more importantly, survivability. In a contested environment, "suboptimal" CAS from an F-35 dropping precision munitions is much better than non at all (A-10 would get shot out of the sky by any near-peer before it could approach the theater). The A-10 also has high maintenance costs and a relatively low loiter time. For fighting terrorists in flipflops, som…

This is an… unorthodox take from the ground commander/fires perspective or conversely the orthodox take from the USAF perspective. Hard lessons from the GWOT have firmly put the A10 as the most capable CAS platform, and it’s taught as such in all joint fires classes to forward observers and also via unit history/anecdotes fires units (“A10 saved my butt in ‘12”). A10 pilots and units also have a much better rep for C…

> Hard lessons from the GWOT which must be unlearned for an neer-peer engagement.

and again, a turboprop light attack aircraft armed with smart bombs can play a similar role as an A10 for CAS but significantly cheaper and with a longer loiter-time to boot.

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

#393

Post by bumby »

rbanffy wrote: post #311
bumby wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not sure there’s much relaxing in quality control in aerospace. The specs are already pretty tight.

You could, but usually that causes lower performance. When building an airframe, a gram not needed is a gram wasted. In fighters it's far less stringent than spacecraft - for those, even a screw one turn longer than needed is something to avoid.

(FWIW, when I'm saying 'aerospace' I'm using it to jointly refer to "space" and "aeronautics," just in case I gave the impression I was only talking about spaceflight.)

Those are technical specs, not quality specs. The quality specs would deal with things like machining tolerances, manufacturer traceability, etc.

Point being, if Pratt & Whitney took a seal design from another aircraft to apply to the F-35, it's not like they aren't already tracking the tolerances, material compatibility, etc. When I worked in aerospace, it was very rare that we went to the machine shop to ask for them to make a bespoke component.

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

#394

Post by justsomehnguy »

ciscoriordan wrote: post #390
MarkMarine wrote: post #384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I live in the real world, and there are incident reports that go into great detail about every aircraft loss. I’ve read every one since 1999, and I’ve never seen an incident where the pilot ejected over a populated area in an aircraft that was still controlled. What you all are imagining does not happen, and the odds of it happening are vanishingly small.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/russian-su-34-fullback... “The statement went on to add that the crash was caused by an issue with one of the engines during takeoff, but the jet's two crewmembers are said to have ejected safely and survived. The extent of the injuries to the apartment building's tenants as well as civilians in the surrounding area is unknown at present.”

"To the last I struggled to lift the plane, [but] copilot Yuriy Yegorov hit the catapult [triggering ejection] and we two ejected with our seats."

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

#395

Post by ImHereToVote »

mrtksn wrote: post #219
ceejayoz wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The same way the F-35 does I guess. No, because that's in part "let the human pilot make decisions". > Besides, it's pretty common for AI systems to overtake human capabilities these days... Not in the realm of "should I shoot that thing?" sort of decisions.

let the human pilot make decisions == let the machine make decisions It's not like pilots are making political decisions. They pilot and shoot predefined targets, avoid hostile actions. AI is capable of doing this. > Not in the realm of "should I shoot that thing?" sort of decisions. On the contrary, AI is very capable of making that decision. There are no philosophical dilemmas or children in the skies and even if t…

I'm more worried about domestic use. It's hard to get soldiers to carpet bomb wrong thinkers.

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

#396

Post by dragonwriter »

valec wrote: post #392
dogman144 wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is an… unorthodox take from the ground commander/fires perspective or conversely the orthodox take from the USAF perspective. Hard lessons from the GWOT have firmly put the A10 as the most capable CAS platform, and it’s taught as such in all joint fires classes to forward observers and also via unit history/anecdotes fires units (“A10 saved my butt in ‘12”). A10 pilots and units also have a much better rep for C…

> Hard lessons from the GWOT which must be unlearned for an neer-peer engagement. and again, a turboprop light attack aircraft armed with smart bombs can play a similar role as an A10 for CAS but significantly cheaper and with a longer loiter-time to boot.

> a turboprop light attack aircraft armed with smart bombs can play a similar role as an A10 for CAS but significantly cheaper and with a longer loiter-time to boot.

Well, if you ignore how much quicker it will be shot down (in any environment where at least one of the two would be usable at all against combat forces), sure.

OTOH, the set of environments in which even the A-10 is usable is only going to shrink over time.

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

#397

Post by CodeWriter23 »

Scoundreller wrote: post #301
tehf0x wrote: post #265

So a similar thing happened near some friends' in France. A military jet crashed into the forest near their house, but the air force couldn't figure out where it had gone. Eventually a farmer noticed that a new pond had appeared on his land. The jet made enough of a crater when crashing that drained the nearby swamp and created a new pond deep enough to conceal the full fuselage, thus completely hiding the airplane.…

I wonder if some of the "autopilot" functionality for military aircraft is to swan-dive into water/forest if everyone has already ejected. If it's going to crash (and can't autoland, which it probably shouldn't attempt even if it could if something ejection-worthy happened), might as well obliterate the thing in a safe place.

I think the failures leading up to ejection preclude any kind of automated flight control afterward. Seeing how modern aircraft are all fly by wire.

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

#398

Post by eevilspock »

throw0101c wrote: post #338
hollerith wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If F-35 is such a failure, how come many countries have chosen to buy it? Consulting this next page, I count 8 countries besides the US that have taken delivery of F-35s, plus many that have ordered it, but not yet taken delivery: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning... The UK for example currently has a fleet of 32, and Australia has 50.

> If F-35 is such a failure, how come many countries have chosen to buy it? What's the alternative? How many other models can be purchased at all? Canada went through a bunch of drama to find a replacement for the legacy F/A-18s, and the main options were: Eurofighter Typhoon, Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, F-35, and the Saab Gripen. * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning... Gripen wasn't in t…

> Personally I'd be happy with...

There's a lot of armchair quarterbacking in these comments, this one taking the cake.

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

#399

Post by ianburrell »

dogman144 wrote: post #247
valec wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The F-35 has a much faster response time than the A-10--and, more importantly, survivability. In a contested environment, "suboptimal" CAS from an F-35 dropping precision munitions is much better than non at all (A-10 would get shot out of the sky by any near-peer before it could approach the theater). The A-10 also has high maintenance costs and a relatively low loiter time. For fighting terrorists in flipflops, som…

This is an… unorthodox take from the ground commander/fires perspective or conversely the orthodox take from the USAF perspective. Hard lessons from the GWOT have firmly put the A10 as the most capable CAS platform, and it’s taught as such in all joint fires classes to forward observers and also via unit history/anecdotes fires units (“A10 saved my butt in ‘12”). A10 pilots and units also have a much better rep for C…

The most capable CAS platform, and one of the most widely used, was the B-1 bomber. Flying in circles for hours and dropping scores of guided bombs.

The best CAS in GWOT would have been the Super Tucano if the program hadn't taken so long. It would have done the same job as A-10 but much cheaper.

The CAS mission is obsolete outside of counterinsurgency. MANPADs mean that going low and slow is a death trap. Getting low and slow was needed in the past to identify targets and make dumb weapons accurate. Now fighters fly at medium altitude for safety and drop guided weapons. Ukraine shows that medium altitude is dangerous with near-peer conflict without air supremacy.

The F-35 is required to gain air supremacy. If you have them, might as well use them for ground support. I think drones will change things with CAS. On one end, can have small attack helicopter drones for direct support. On the other, can have large drone that loiters for long time dropping bombs. The F-35 will be used for things it is good at.

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

#400

Post by mcpackieh »

kristjansson wrote: post #287
tra3 wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The confluence of events that allowed an unpiloted jet to land with its engine idling.. its unbelievable.

Incredible: > One of the other pilots on the mission was reported to have radioed Foust during his descent by parachute that "you'd better get back in it!"

The best part is he actually did (nine years later.)
Post reply on HN