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

F-35 pilot held 50-minute airborne conference call with engineers before crash

cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 440 posts

Re: F-35 pilot held 50-minute airborne conference call with engineers before crash

#241

Post by NelsonMinar »

tempodox wrote: post #210

Apart from the water in the hydraulic system this reads as though there is such a thing as too much automation. The plane being uncontrollable because you cannot convince it it’s not on the ground while it’s actually in the air can only lead to catastrophic results. I’d call that a design bug.

That was the part that leapt out to me in the article. A touch-and-go caused the plane software to become uncontrollable? I know fly by wire is a necessity for this kind of aircraft but the damn thing better work right.

Re: F-35 pilot held 50-minute airborne conference call with engineers before crash

#242

Post by colechristensen »

For one of the aircraft mentioned in Skunk Works Lockheed insisted on doing the maintenance themselves because the military maintenance folks were making mistakes causing aircraft failures.

This incident is a data point in the "right to repair" where Congress is trying to force defense contractors to make all of their equipment entirely maintained by DoD workers, apparently they make mistakes though because in this case it is the stupid failure of a significant portion of the hydraulic fluid being water (which is a problem you could cause in your car but don't because you're not foolish and you put in the correct fluid and don't just fill your radiator up with water)

Re: F-35 pilot held 50-minute airborne conference call with engineers before crash

#244

Post by palata »

jefftk wrote: post #230
nacnud wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to the ejection seat manufacturer [1] there is no minimum height or speed at which the ejection seat can be used, so as long as the aircraft is roughly level then the ejection should be survivable. [1] https://martin-baker.com/ejection-seats/us16e/

I would expect if the aircraft were level at 50 ft above the ground, flying inverted, an ejection would not be survivable.

I assume it's what they meant with "as long as the aircraft is roughly level"...

Re: F-35 pilot held 50-minute airborne conference call with engineers before crash

#245

Post by rswail »

Sharlin wrote: post #226
gukov wrote: post #199

Isn’t F-35 capable of VTOL? Couldn’t they just land on the belly? Or the malfunctioning landing gears disabled VTOL?

No. F-35A is conventional take-off and landing. F-35B is STOVL. F-35C is CATOBAR (catapult take-off, arrestor landing).

Army, Marines, Navy?

Re: F-35 pilot held 50-minute airborne conference call with engineers before crash

#246

Post by whazor »

yellow_lead wrote: post #43

> Five engineers participated in the call, including a senior software engineer, a flight safety engineer and three specialists in landing gear systems, the report said. I can't imagine the stress of being on this call as an engineer. It's like a production outage but the consequences are life and death. Of course, the pilot probably felt more stressed.

In a good engineering and a safety culture, a death should never be considered the mistake of a couple individuals. Mistakes are always because of a process failing.

Re: F-35 pilot held 50-minute airborne conference call with engineers before crash

#247

Post by grumpy-de-sre »

HelloNurse wrote: post #233
grumpy-de-sre wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Likely contamination of ground handling equipment [1]. Unfortunately can happen. I wonder if the hydraulic fluid is hygroscopic or something? 1. https://www.pacaf.af.mil/Portals/6/documents/3_AIB%20Report....

But what ground handling equipment? Does the hydraulic fluid need to be replaced after normal usage? Any intervention is an opportunity for mishaps, failure and sabotage. I'd expect the unlimited F-35 budget to come up with some formula that resists fire, cold, heat and pressure and doesn't need refills and/or with water detectors and other safety-critical chemical sensors in the hydraulic system.

Everything leaks hydraulic fluid, it's just an inherent property of any system with dynamic seals.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/d3ruv-IsGMo

Re: F-35 pilot held 50-minute airborne conference call with engineers before crash

#248

Post by delfinom »

incone123 wrote: post #228
keepamovin wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It risks career. 2 ejections and you won’t fly for the military any more.

I went to an ejected pilot call when I worked in EMS. Guy was ok but protocol was handle as potential spinal injury. The force of ejecting puts a lot of compression on intervertebral discs and the effect is cumulative so more ejections means more chance of trashing your back.

I'm surprised they don't design the seats such that they pop out two bars under your armpit so that you transfer some of the forces into your shoulder and collar bone instead of just the spine.

Same way car seat belts horribly injure people if they let it rest on their stomachs instead of on their hips.

Re: F-35 pilot held 50-minute airborne conference call with engineers before crash

#249

Post by scottLobster »

pear01 wrote: post #219
TiredOfLife wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That F-117 was because it was flying every day for months on the same route at the same time and they lucked out with radar catching the plane during the couple seconds it's bomb doors were open.

Yes, and they did that because of the same arrogance alluded to in my quote.

If the worst we have to worry about is China getting similarly lucky a few times, we'll win handily.
Post reply on HN