This is wild. You can't get away from these zoom calls even as an F-35 pilot.
I'd pay a lot of money for a zoom premium version that has a real eject button.
Here you go:
F-35 pilot held 50-minute airborne conference call with engineers before crash
351–360 of 440 posts
Re: F-35 pilot held 50-minute airborne conference call with engineers before crash
#352Earlier quoted context omitted.
SOF initiates Conference Hotel procedures, FYI. It's a (rarely used) checklist in their book. SOF is the pilot sitting in the tower to liase with ATC and handle emergencies from an ops perspective.
To the uninitiated: SOF is Supervisor of Flying.
Classic DoD with its overloaded acronyms. I first read the sentence thinking "what does this have to do with Special Operations Forces"?
Re: F-35 pilot held 50-minute airborne conference call with engineers before crash
#353Earlier quoted context omitted.
For me, that was a moment when I realized that the received wisdom about military things can be just completely wrong. I had considered myself to be reasonably informed about the F-35, and how "everyone knows" it's a boondoggle. I think this started with a long-form article I read in 2013, "How the U.S. and Its Allies Got Stuck with the World’s Worst New Warplane": https://medium.com/war-is-boring/fd-how-the-u-s-and-…
Do you have any reason to attribute this to the fact they were F-35s? For comparison, how many jets were lost during "shock and awe"? Israel operates with impunity in Iran all the time, often on the ground. I'm not sure the fact they used F-35s is actually relevant here but if you have a source on that it would be interesting to read. Given the state of Iran it is hard to imagine the same could not be achieved with a…
If you look at the Ukraine war the planes are operating from a distance to the frontlines on both sides. The ones close the the front fly in low and then climb and drop their guided distance munitions.
Re: F-35 pilot held 50-minute airborne conference call with engineers before crash
#354Earlier quoted context omitted.
And, of course, CNN only links to their own articles. Why bother linking to the actual report? The rise in sites that only link to themselves 99% of the time really frustrates me.
Journalism's failure to adopt linking to sources etc in the internet age is kind of infuriating. I get it, back in physical newspaper/magazine days, linking wasn't possible, and it takes a while for new norms to change and habits to form, but articles have been internet-first for well over a decade at this point. It should be completely unacceptable not to have linking to sources whenever relevant. I'm not sure I hav…
[deleted]
Re: F-35 pilot held 50-minute airborne conference call with engineers before crash
#355Earlier quoted context omitted.
You sure about that? You should look at the F-35's performance in Israeli hands in their recent strikes on Iran.
For me, that was a moment when I realized that the received wisdom about military things can be just completely wrong. I had considered myself to be reasonably informed about the F-35, and how "everyone knows" it's a boondoggle. I think this started with a long-form article I read in 2013, "How the U.S. and Its Allies Got Stuck with the World’s Worst New Warplane": https://medium.com/war-is-boring/fd-how-the-u-s-and-…
The west has been in a very negative mood for a few years now. I'd generally discount the "We're losing the x race to y" kind of talk.
The f22 is more elegant though
Re: F-35 pilot held 50-minute airborne conference call with engineers before crash
#356Earlier quoted context omitted.
How does a pilot switch between the three modes? Just switches on the dash?
This is a very "Don't do this" kind of situation but you can force the computer to switch to a different law by pulling circuit breakers for certain instruments. Typically though it will happen automatically when the computer detects sensor failures. Changing the law of the aircraft is something you REALLY do not want to do. It's a "The Airplane broke real bad, do that pilot thing!" situation. Especially on a fighter…
Very interesting. Reminds me of 2001 a space odyssey when the pilot unplugs parts of Hals brain in order to regain control over the ship.
Re: F-35 pilot held 50-minute airborne conference call with engineers before crash
#357Just a thought (I am no airline expert), If it costed 200 million to build the plane that was destroyed because landing gear can not be deployed then maybe it's time to think about building a catcher similar to spacex booster catch.
This would probably need different plane design like vertical landing and horizontal landing gears.
Re: F-35 pilot held 50-minute airborne conference call with engineers before crash
#358Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don't read the article; read the report.
Sure, of course I will trust the report as the source of truth. But I'm interested in the reporting. There are, you know, journalistic standards, which are considered kinda "journalism 101"! For instance, getting the basic facts of a story correct - especially the facts stated in the headline . So I'm curious, did the reporter do their due diligence, and write the article in a way that is factually correct, but highl…
>But I'm interested in the reporting. There are, you know, journalistic standards, which are considered kinda "journalism 101"! For instance, getting the basic facts of a story correct - especially the facts stated in the headline.
Every single story is like this, every one, and f-them for not linking to the source documents.
Re: F-35 pilot held 50-minute airborne conference call with engineers before crash
#359[flagged]
Rafale and Gripen don't hold a candle to the F35's capabilities, they're just a different class of aircraft. Not to say any one of the three is bad, but the EU currently just does not have it in them to have a viable competitor.
Re: F-35 pilot held 50-minute airborne conference call with engineers before crash
#360Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The article is somewhat sensationalistic somewhat sensationalistic?! The article clearly tries to give the impression the pilot was on the call: > A US Air Force F-35 pilot spent 50 minutes on an airborne conference call with Lockheed Martin engineers trying to solve a problem with his fighter jet before he ejected Knowing the quality of media these days, it wouldn't surprise me if it CNN just got it really wrong,…
You omitted an important part of the sentence (in italics below): > The MP initiated a conference call with Lockheed Martin engineers through the on-duty supervisor of flying (SOF). The MA held for approximately 50 minutes while the team developed a plan of action. So it was the SOF on the conference call, relaying information to and from the pilot over the radio. This is more clear if you read the sequence of events…
Confusingly enough, there are these two parts in the previously linked document:
> The MP initiated a conference call with Lockheed Martin engineers. The MA held for approximately 50 minutes while the team developed a plan of action - Page 35
And
> The MP initiated a conference call with Lockheed Martin engineers through the on-duty supervisor of flying (SOF). The MA held for approximately 50 minutes while the team developed a plan of action - Page 2
I quoted from the Page 35, you quoted from the Page 2, not confusing at all of them to have very similar stuff with slightly different meaning, all in the same document :) Thanks nonetheless for the additional context!