251–260 of 508 posts
So there is serious electrical malfunction and the pilot loses communication and also some of his displays multiple times.
In hindsight we know it wasn't that serious and the plane could have kept flying.
But how can the pilot figure that out, while flying the aircraft? One needs to evaluate decisions based on the information available at the time the decision was made.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
At least one concept of it is that officers (and NCOs and maybe others) are expected to succeed when the 'book' is insufficient. Following the manual is not nearly enough. Warfare is chaos; unexpected things happen; the manual is one input but people are expected to take initiative and overcome problems with or without it. It's not extra credit, it's a baseline expectation for the job. Also, this person is a colonel,…
This and the fact that he didn't make the slightest attempt to work around it. He had a flyable plane with plenty of fuel, a functioning backup radio and instruments he could have verified primaries against or just switched to, and even failing everything else, he could have verified against what the tower saw on radar for speed, heading, altitude, etc...and then asked the tower to get him to his wingman, and then fo…
> The investigation report said the F-35′s transponder failed as a result of the electrical malfunction So there is serious electrical malfunction and the pilot loses communication and also some of his displays multiple times. In hindsight we know it wasn't that serious and the plane could have kept flying. But how can the pilot figure that out, while flying the aircraft? One needs to evaluate decisions based on the…
>It was the Marines’ third aviation crash in six weeks, following the August crash of an F/A-18D Hornet in southern California, which killed its pilot, and an MV-22 Osprey crash in Australia that killed three Marines.
The report criticizes the pilot for ejecting, but also says he did everything by the book (F35 manual), but the book was wrong. And the pilot should've figured that out? Feels like they just need someone to blame for losing the plane.
That's not what the report is alleged to have said. This news story alleges that he executed proper emergency procedures, but for the WRONG emergency. It alleges he ejected per the procedure for out-of-control flight when what he actually (allegedly) had was partial electrical failure with operable standby instruments. Which is not a situation mandating immediate ejection.
He also lost part of his displays during conditions with little sight.
So imo the question should be if it would have been possible for him to check if the airplane is really out of control, in a way that it wouldn't cost his life if it was.
If you're familiar with USA military history, the Americans are (were) famous for not doing things by the book for the right reasons, and letting common sense prevail, as well as incentivizing good outcomes. “A serious problem in planning against American doctrine is that the Americans do not read their manuals, nor do they feel any obligation to follow their doctrine.” “The reason that the American Navy does so well…
There is 0 people in the US Navy that did service in the 2WW. There has been multiple generations. There is no way there is that much of institutional inertia, if the quote was correct at the time.
Punnishing failure disincentives a lot of things. It has drawbacks.
The report criticizes the pilot for ejecting, but also says he did everything by the book (F35 manual), but the book was wrong. And the pilot should've figured that out? Feels like they just need someone to blame for losing the plane.
The fact that the plane was able to fly over 60 miles after he ejected kinda proves that ejecting wasn't really needed.
> “How in the hell do you lose an F-35?” Mace posted on X, formerly known as Twitter. “How is there not a tracking device and we’re asking the public to what, find a jet and turn it in?” This sounds like a potent critique of 5th generation fighters but it's quite not. The F-35 is meant to be lost - it can't even use standard Link 16 because it reveals too much of it's presence to enemy fighters. The idea of it lackin…
Reading the article before posting comments could help.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fully agree but as usual it was more complicated than this even. Losing controls and instruments in IMC conditions could mean you're straight and level with many minutes to troubleshoot and try things off book, or maybe another attitude like a graveyard spiral towards the deck with seconds to decide. We might not have all the details to armchair fly it.
He didn’t lose the controls _or_ the instruments. He lost his HUD and the primary flight display. But the standby instrument display was still working correctly, and the fly–by–wire system was still accepting input and acting on it correctly. Sure, if those things had failed then ejecting would have been fine. But he didn’t even check them to see if they were still working or not, he just bailed out of a flyable plan…
Brief summary and my understanding of why this occurred: - Pilot ejects, survives while losing very expensive plane - The crash is Marine's third in several weeks, the other two having fatalities; leads to a safety stand down across the entire corps - Investigation concludes that ejection was unnecessary and so fault of the crash is on the pilot, however adding that the procedures written were overly broad - Pilot is…
> The crash is Marine's third in several weeks Should be “the Marines’ third.” I don’t mean to be a stickler, but for a moment I thought this one pilot was crashing a plane a week!